UC-NRLF 


EDITED   BT 


JOHN  T.  MORSE,  JR. 


American  Statesmen 


ANDREW  JACKSON 


BY 


WILLIAM  GKAHAM  SUMNEK 

EBOIESSOB  OF  POLITICAL  AND  SOCIAL  SCIENCE  IN  TALE  UNIVERSITY 


BOSTON  AND  NEW  YORK 

HOUGHTON  MIFFLIN  COMPANY 

(Cfte  ftifccrtfi&e  prt?£  Cambribge 

VRY 

UN"  •  ALIFORNM 


UNIV. 


Copyright,  1882  and  1899, 
BY  WILLIAM  GRAHAM  SUMNER. 

Copyright,  1899, 
BY  HOUGHTON,  MIFFLIN  &  CO. 

All  rights  reserved. 


PREFACE 

THIS  new  edition  of  this  book  has  been  revised 
line  by  line,  and  the  corrections,  amendments,  and 
additions,  which  have  been  collected  during  the 
sixteen  years  since  it  was  first  written,  are  now 
incorporated  in  it.  I  have  had  the  very  great 
advantage  of  using  a  collection  of  unpublished  let- 
ters of  Jackson  to  William  B.  Lewis,  250  in  num- 
ber, the  property  of  the  Messrs.  Ford.  I  have 
been  allowed  to  avail  myself  of  all  the  material  in 
these  letters  which  was  useful  for  my  purpose  ; 
and  I  have  now  to  make  my  acknowledgments  to 
the  owners  of  them  for  their  courtesy  and  gener- 
osity. In  the  quotations  from  Jackson's  letters  I 
have  reproduced  the  original  exactly,  as  respects 
spelling,  punctuation,  and  capitals,  not  even  cor- 
recting obvious  slips  of  the  pen,  or  inaccuracies 
of  an  old  man.  It  is  left  to  the  reader  to  make 
such  allowances  where  necessary.  As  I  have  been 
under  strict  injunctions  not  to  increase  the  size  of 
the  book,  I  have  cancelled  much  which  was  in- 
tended, in  the  first  edition,  to  elucidate  events  or 
proceedings  of  Jackson's  time,  but  which  did  not 

198667 


PREFACE 

strictly  belong  to  it.  The  cancelled  passages  were 
especially  important  in  Chapters  VIII.,  IX.,  and 
X.  of  the  first  edition.  The  great  number  of 
excellent  works  which  have  been  added  to  the 
literature  of  American  history  within  sixteen  years 
make  these  passages  less  necessary.  On  the  whole, 
therefore,  I  have  curtailed  the  history  and  extended 
the  biography. 

W.  G.  SUMNER. 
YALE  UNIVERSITY,  October,  1898. 


CONTENTS 

CHAP.  PAGE 

I.  THE  FIRST  FORTY-FIVE  YEARS  OF  JACKSON'S  LIFE  1 

II.  THE  CREEK  WAR  AND  THE  WAR  WITH  ENGLAND  30 

III.  JACKSON  IN  FLORIDA 60 

IV.  ELECTION  OF  1824 92 

V.  ADAMS'S  ADMINISTRATION 129 

VI.  THE  "RELIEF"  SYSTEM  OF  KENTUCKY     .        .        151 
VII.  INTERNAL  HISTORY  OF  JACKSON'S  FIRST  ADMINIS- 
TRATION          176 

VIII.  PUBLIC  QUESTIONS  OF  JACKSON'S  FIRST  ADMINIS- 
TRATION       214 

1.  West  India  Trade;  2.  Spoliation  Claims;  3. 
Federal  Judiciary ;  4.  Indians ;  5.  Public  Lands ; 
6.  Internal  Improvements;  7.  Tariff;  8.  Nullifi- 
cation: 9.  Bank. 

IX.  THE  CAMPAIGN  OF  1832 289 

X.  TARIFF,  NULLIFICATION,  AND  THE  BANK  DURING 

JACKSON'S  SECOND  ADMINISTRATION        .        .        322 
XI.  SPECULATION,  DISTRIBUTION,  CURRENCY  LEGISLA- 
TION,   AND  END  OF  THE    BANK    OF    THE    UNITED 

STATES 377 

XII.  THE  NEW  SPIRIT  IN  VARIOUS  POINTS  OF  FOREIGN 

AND  DOMESTIC  POLICY 402 

XIII.  THE  ELECTION  OF  1836.  — END  OF  JACKSON'S  CA- 
REER   439 

FULL  TITLES  OF  BOOKS  REFERRED  TO  is  THIS 

VOLUME .    461 

INDEX    .  .  469 


OF   THE 

UNIVERSITY 

OF 


ANDREW  JACKSON 

CHAPTER  I 

THE  FIRST  FORTY-FIVE  YEARS  OF  JACKSON'S  LIFE 

IN  the  middle  of  the  last  century  a  number  of 
Scotchmen  and  Scotch-Irishmen  migrated  to  the 
uplands  of  North  and  South  Carolina.  Among 
these  was  Andrew  Jackson,  who  came  over  in  1765, 
with  his  wife  and  two  sons,  being  accompanied 
also  by  several  neighbors  and  connections  from 
Carrickfergus,  County  Antrim,  Ireland.  They  ap- 
pear to  have  been  led  to  the  spot  at  which  they 
settled,  on  the  upper  waters  of  the  Catawba  river, 
by  the  fact  that  persons  of  their  acquaintance  in 
Ireland  had  previously  found  their  way  thither, 
under  special  inducements  which  were  offered  to 
immigrants.1  The  settlement  was  called  the  Wax 
haw  Settlement,  and  was  in  Mecklenburg  County; 
North  Carolina,  but  close  to  the  South  Carolin? 

1  2  Hewitt,  13,  268,  272.  A  bounty  was  offered  equal  to  the 
cost  of  passage.  Ship  captains  became  immigration  agents. 

For  the  full  titles  of  books  referred  to,  see  the  list  at  the  end  of  tht> 
volume. 


2  ANDREW  JACKSON 

boundary.  Andrew  Jackson  had  no  capital,  and 
never  became  an  owner  of  land.  In  1767  he  died. 
His  son  Andrew  was  born  within  a  few  days  of 
the  father's  death,  March  15,  1767.  Parton  fixes 
his  birthplace  in  Union  County,  North  Carolina ; 
Kendall  in  South  Carolina.  In  Jackson's  Pro- 
clamation of  1832,  in  a  letter  of  December  24, 
1830,1  and  in  his  will,  he  speaks  of  himself  as  a 
native  of  South  Carolina. 

It  appears  that  Andrew  Jackson's  mother  aban- 
doned the  settlement  which  her  husband  had  com- 
menced, and  it  is  probable  that  she  owed  much  to 
the  assistance  of  her  relatives  and  connections  while 
Andrew  was  a  child.  Circumstances  of  birth  more 
humble  than  those  of  this  child  can  scarcely  be 
imagined.  It  was  not,  probably,  hard  to  sustain 
life  in  such  a  frontier  community.  Coarse  food 
was  abundant;  but  to  get  more  out  of  life  than 
beasts  get  when  they  have  enough  to  eat  was  no 
doubt  very  difficult.  The  traditions  of  Jackson's 
education  are  vague  and  uncertain.  Of  book-learn- 
ing and  school-training  he  appears  to  have  got 
very  little  indeed. 

The  population  of  the  district  was  heterogeneous, 
and,  when  the  Revolutionary  War  broke  out,  the 
differences  of  nationality  and  creed  divided  the 
people  by  opposing  sympathies  as  to  the  war.  The 
English  penetrated  the  district  several  times  in  the 
hope  of  winning  recruits  and  strengthening  the 
tories.  On  one  of  these  raids  Andrew  Jackson 
1  39  Niles,  385. 


THE  STUDY  OF  LAW  3 

was  wounded  by  an  officer,  who  struck  him  because 
he  refused  to  brush  the  officer's  boots.  He  and 
his  brother  were  taken  prisoners  to  Camden.  The 
war  cost  the  lives  of  both  Andrew's  brothers,  and 
also  that  of  his  mother,  who  died  while  on  a  journey 
to  Charleston  to  help  care  for  the  prisoners  there. 
Andrew  Jackson  accordingly  came  to  entertain  a 
vigorous  hatred  of  the  English  from  a  very  early 
age.  In  1781  he  was  alone  in  the  world.  What 
means  of  support  he  had  we  do  not  know,  but, 
after  trying  the  saddler's  trade,  he  became,  in 
1784,  a  student  of  law  at  Salisbury,  North  Caro- 
lina. The  traditions  collected  by  Parton  of  Jack- 
son's conduct  at  this  time  give  us  anything  but  the 
picture,  so  familiar  in  political  biography,  of  the 
orphan  boy  hewing  his  way  up  to  the  presidency 
by  industry  and  self-denial.  If  the  information  is 
trustworthy,  Jackson  was  gay,  careless,  rollicking, 
fond  of  horses,  racing,  cock-fighting,  and  mischief. 
Four  years  were  spent  in  this  way. 

It  is  necessary  to  note  the  significance  of  the 
fact  that  a  young  man  situated  as  Jackson  was 
should  undertake  to  "  study  law." 

In  the  generation  before  the  Revolution  the  in- 
tellectual activity  of  the  young  men,  which  had 
previously  been  expended  in  theology,  began  to  be 
directed  to  the  law.  As  capital  increased  and  pro- 
perty rights  became  more  complicated  there  was 
more  need  for  legal  training.  In  an  agricultural 
community  there  was  a  great  deal  of  leisure  at 
certain  seasons  of  the  year,  and  the  actual  outlay 


4  ANDREW  JACKSON 

required  for  an  education  was  small.  The  standard 
of  attainments  was  low,  and  it  was  easy  for  a 
farmer's  boy  of  any  diligence  to  acquire,  in  his 
winter's  leisure,  as  much  book-learning  as  the  best 
colleges  gave.  In  truth  the  range  of  ideas,  among 
the  best  classes,  about  law,  history,  political  science, 
and  political  economy,  was  narrow  in  the  extreme. 
What  the  aspiring  class  of  young  men  who  were 
self-educated  lacked,  as  compared  with  the  techni- 
cally "educated,"  was  the  bits  of  classical  and 
theological  dogmatism  which  the  colleges  taught 
by  tradition,  and  the  culture  which  is  obtained  by 
frequenting  academical  society,  however  meagre 
may  be  the  positive  instruction  given  by  the  insti- 
tution. What  the  same  aspiring  youths  had  in 
excess  of  the  regularly  educated  was  self-confi- 
dence, bred  by  ignorance  of  their  own  short-com- 
ings. They  were  therefore  considered  pushing 
and  offensive  by  the  colonial  aristocracy  of  place- 
holders and  established  families,  who  considered 
that  "the  ministry"  was  the  proper  place  for 
aspiring  cleverness,  and  that  it  was  intrusive  when 
it  pushed  into  civil  life.  The  restiveness  of  the 
aspiring  class  under  this  repression  was  one  of  the 
great  causes  of  the  Revolution.  The  lawyers  be- 
came the 'leaders  in  the  revolt  everywhere.  The 
established  classes  were,  as  classes,  tories.  After 
the  war  the  way  was  clear  for  every  one  who  wanted 
office,  or  influence,  or  notoriety,  to  attain  these 
ends.  The  first  step  was  to  study  law.  If  a  young 
wan  heard  a  public  speaker,  and  was  fired  by  the 


THE  STUDY  OF  LAW  5 

love  of  public  activity  and  applause,  or  if  he  be- 
came engaged  in  political  controversy,  and  was 
regarded  by  his  fellows  as  a  good  disputant,  or  if 
he  chanced  to  read  something  which  set  him  think- 
ing, the  result  was  very  sure  to  be  that  he  read 
some  law.  The  men,  whose  biographies  we  read 
because  they  rose  to  eminence,  present  us  over  and 
over  again  the  same  picture  of  a  youth,  with  only 
a  common  school  education,  who  spends  his  leisure 
in  reading  law,  while  he  earns  his  living  by  teach- 
ing or  by  farm  work.  Those,  however,  whose  bio- 
graphies we  read  are  only  the  select  few  who 
succeeded,  out  of  the  thousands  who  started  on  the 
same  road,  and  who  were  arrested  by  one  circum- 
stance or  another,  which  threw  them  back  into  the 
ranks  of  farmers  and  store-keepers.  We  shall  see 
that  Andrew  Jackson  so  fell  back  into  the  position 
of  a  farmer  and  store-keeper.  Chance  plays  a 
great  role  in  a  new  community,  just  as  it  does  in  9- 
primitive  civilization.  Chance  had  very  much  to 
do  with  Jackson's  career.  We  have  no  evidence 
that  he  was  dissatisfied  with  his  circumstances,  and 
set  himself  to  work  to  get  out  of  them,  or  that  he 
had  any  strong  ambition  towards  which  the  law 
was  a  step.  There  is  no  proof  that  he  ever  was  an 
ambitious  man ;  but  rather  the  contrary.  He  never 
learned  any  law,  and  never  to  the  end  of  his 
life  had  a  legal  tone  of  mind ;  even  his  admirer, 
Kendall,  admits  this.1  His  study  of  law  had  no 
influence  on  his  career,  and  no  significance  for  his 

1  Jackson,  109. 


6  ANDREW  JACKSON 

character,  except  that  it  shows  him  following  the 
set  or  fashion  of  the  better  class  of  young  men  of 
his  generation.  If  conjecture  may  be  allowed,  it 
is  most  probable  that  he  did  not  get  on  well  with 
his  relatives,  and  that  he  disliked  the  drudgery  of 
farming  or  saddle-making.  A  journey  which  he 
made  to  Charleston  offers  a  very  possible  chance 
for  him  to  have  had  his  mind  opened  to  plans  and 
ideas. 

In  1789,  Jackson's  friend,  John  McNairy,  was 
appointed  judge  of  the  Superior  Court  of  Law 
and  Equity  of  the  District  of  Mero,  i.  e.,  David- 
son, Sumner,  and  Tennessee  Counties,  Tennessee. 
McNairy  and  Jackson  were  admitted  to  the  bar  at 
Greenville,  in  May,  1788,  the  Court  sitting  there, 
under  the  authority  of  the  State  of  North  Carolina, 
without  interruption,  for  the  first  time  after  the 
Franklin  troubles.1  Jackson  arrived  in  Tennes- 
see in  the  fall  of  1789  or  the  spring  of  1790.  He 
settled  in  Jonesboro.  Tennessee  was  then  a  wild 
frontier  country,  in  which  the  whites  and  Indians 
were  engaged  in  constant  hostilities.  It  was  shut 
off  from  connection  with  the  Atlantic  States  by  the 
mountains,  and  its  best  connection  with  civilization 
was  down  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  rivers.  Such 
frontier  communities  have  always  had  a  peculiar 
character.  In  them  the  white  man  has  conformed, 

1  Haywood,  194.  Haywood  writes  Frankland.  Allison  (29)  says 
that  Sevier's  Correspondence  shows  that  the  State  was  named 
after  Franklin.  Inasmuch  as  Allison  claims  to  have  searched 
court  records,  etc.,  his  dates,  etc.,  are  here  followed. 


FRONTIER  SOCIETY  7 

in  no  small  degree,  to  the  habits  and  occupations 
of  the  Indians.  Cut  off  from  tools,  furniture, 
clothing,  and  other  manufactured  articles  such  as 
civilized  men  use,  he  has  been  driven  to  such  sub- 
stitutes as  he  could  produce  by  bringing  his  intel- 
ligence to  bear  on  the  processes  and  materials  used 
by  the  Indians.  Living  where  game  is  abundant, 
and  where  the  forests  make  agriculture  difficult, 
he  has  often  sunk  back  to  the  verge  of  the  hunt- 
ing stage  of  civilization.1  The  pioneers,  so  much 
lauded  in  song  and  story,  were  men  who  first  broke 
the  path  into  the  wilderness,  but  who  derogated 
from  the  status  of  their  race  to  do  it.  They  became 
incapacitated  for  the  steady  labor  of  civilized  in- 
dustry, and  when  the  country  became  so  filled  up 
that  game  was  scarce,  agriculture  a  necessity,  and 
"  law  "  began  to  be  recognized  and  employed,  the 
pioneers  moved  on  into  the  wilderness.  In  their 
habits  they  were  idle  and  thriftless,  and  almost 
always  too  fond  of  strong  drink.  The  class  of 
settlers  who  succeeded  them  were  but  little  better 
in  their  habits,  although  they  began  to  clear  the 
forests  and  till  the  soil.  They  were  always  very 

1  See  Collins's  Kentucky,  Putnam's  Middle  Tennessee,  Ford's  17- 
linois,  and  Kendall's  Jackson,  74.  To  "indianize  "  was  a  current 
term  for  this  social  phenomenon.  The  worst  manifestation  of  it 
was  the  adoption  of  the  custom  of  scalping1,  and  the  acts  of 
legislation  by  which  bounties  were  offered  for  scalps,  even  for 
those  of  women  and  children.  During  the  war  of  the  Revolution 
there  were,  in  the  mountains  of  East  Tennessee,  white  people 
"more  savage  than  the  Indians.  They  possess  every  one  of  their 
vices  but  not  one  of  their  virtues."  2  Hanger,  404. 


8  ANDREW  JACKSON 

litigious.  Court  day  was  an  occasion  which  drew 
the  men  to  the  county  town,  forming  an  event  in 
a  monotonous  existence,  and  offering  society  to 
people  oppressed  by  isolated  life.  This  concourse 
of  people  furnished  occasion  for  gossip  and  news- 
mongering,  and  the  discussion  of  the  affairs  of 
everybody  for  miles  around.  "  Public  opinion  " 
took  control  of  everything.  Local  quarrels  in- 
volved the  whole  county  sooner  or  later.  Friend- 
ships, alliances,  feuds,  and  animosities  grew  up 
and  were  intensified  in  such  a  state  of  society.  If 
there  was  an  election  pending,  the  same  concourse 
of  people  furnished  an  opportunity  for  speech-mak- 
ing and  argument.  The  institution  of  "stump- 
speaking"  was  born  and  developed  in  these  cir- 
cumstances. In  the  court  itself  the  parties  to  the 
suits  and  the  jury  enjoyed  a  place  before  the  public 
eye.  The  judge  and  the  counsel  made  reputation 
day  by  day.  The  lawyers,  as  actual  or  prospective 
candidates  for  office,  were  directly  and  constantly 
winning  strength  with  the  electors.  They  passed 
from  the  bar  to  the  stump  or  the  tavern  parlor, 
and  employed  the  influence  which  their  eloquence 
had.  won  in  the  court  room  to  advance  the  in- 
terests which  they  favored  in  the  election.  There 
are  features  of  American  democracy  which  are 
inexplicable  unless  one  understands  this  frontier 
society.  Some  of  our  greatest  political  abuses 
have  come  from  transferring  to  our  now  large  and 
crowded  cities  maxims  and  usages  which  were  con- 
venient and  harmless  in  backwoods  county  towns. 


FRONTIER  SOCIETY  9 

Another  feature  of  the  frontier  society  which  it 
is  important  to  notice  is,  that  in  it  the  lack  of 
capital  and  the  intimacy  of  personal  relations  led 
to  great  abuses  of  credit.  Idleness,  drink,  debt, 
and  quarrels  produced  by  gossip  have  been  the 
curses  of  such  society.  The  courts  and  the  lawyers 
were  always  busy  with  the  personal  collisions  which 
arose  where  no  one  was  allowed  to  practise  any 
personal  reserve,  where  each  one's  business  was 
everybody's  business,  where  gossip  never  rested, 
and  where  each  one  was  in  debt  to  some  others. 

In  such  a  state  of  society  the  public  prosecutor 
is  the  general  of  the  advancing  army  of  civiliza- 
tion. He  has  to  try  to  introduce  law  and  order, 
the  fulfilment  of  contracts,  and  the  recognition  of 
rights  into  the  infant  society.  This  was  the  task 
which  Jackson  undertook  in  Tennessee.  It  re- 
quired nerve  and  vigor.  The  western  counties  of 
North  Carolina  were  in  a  state  of  anarchy,  resulting 
from  the  attempt  to  set  up  the  State  of  Franklin, 
and  the  population  were  so  turbulent  and  lawless 
that  the  representative  of  legal  order  was  at  open 
war  with  them.  There  had  been  civil  war  in  the 
district  for  four  years. 

The  proceedings  by  which  the  State  of  Franklin 
was  brought  into  existence  were  suggested  and 
carried  out  upon  principles  and  notions  which  can 
only  be  characterized  as  squatterism.  The  colo- 
nists at  the  outset,  especially  those  of  New  Eng- 
land, took  their  stand  on  squatterism,  without  re* 
flection  or  question.  The  primary  standpoint  or 


10  ANDREW  JACKSON 

view  on  which  it  rests  is  the  notion  that  a  group 
of  people  who  find  themselves  in  what  the  New 
Englanders  called  a  "vacuum  domicilium"  (put- 
ting it  in  Latin  to  give  it  emphasis  since  it  lacked 
contents)  may  hold  a  mass  meeting,  and  create  a 
state,  without  regard  to  the  jurisdiction  of  some 
political  body  already  existing,  which  has  historical 
and  legal  authority  over  the  territory  in  which  they 
are.  Many  conflicts  arose  in  the  colonial  history 
from  the  collision  between  squatterism  and  con- 
stituted authority,  and  three  or  four  very  important 
cases  have  occurred  in  the  federal  history.1  Frank- 
lin was  the  first.  The  conflict  is  always  attended 
by  big  declarations  about  "  liberty  "  on  the  part  of 
the  squatters,  and  when  they  are  forced  to  submit 
to  law  and  constitutional  order,  great  irritation  is 
sure  to  be  produced. 

The  Indians  and  whites  were  also  engaged  in 
the  final  struggle  of  the  former  before  yielding 
their  hunting-grounds  to  the  cultivation  of  the 
white  man.  Jackson  had  to  travel  up  and  down 
the  country  in  the  discharge  of  his  duties,  when  he 
was  in  danger  of  his  life  upon  the  road.  He 
brought  all  the  required  force  and  virtue  to  the 
discharge  of  the  duties  of  this  office.  He  pursued 
his  way  without  fear  and  without  relenting.  He 
made  strong  enemies,  and  he  won  strong  friends. 
Kendall  says  that  Jackson  settled  at  Nashville, 
because  the  debtors  there  tried  to  drive  him  away, 
he  having  taken  some  collection  cases.2  His  merits 

1  See  p.  446.  2  Kendall's  Jackson,  90. 


JACKSON'S  MARRIAGE  11 

as  prosecutor1  are  vouched  for  by  the  fact  that 
Governor  Blount  said  of  him,  in  reference  to  cer- 
tain intruders  on  Indian  lands  who  were  giving 
trouble,  "  Let  the  District  Attorney,  Mr.  Jackson, 
be  informed.  He  will  be  certain  to  do  his  duty, 
and  the  offenders  will  be  punished."  2  As  to  the 
administration  of  justice  in  such  a  society,  the  colo- 
nial records  show  how  slight  were  the  guarantees 
of  civil  liberty  against  popular  power.  Allison3 
proves  it  again  in  his  description  of  the  primitive 
court  of  Tennessee  and  its  proceedings. 

Among  the  earliest  settlers  of  Middle  Tennessee 
(1780)  was  John  Donelson,  who  had  been  killed 
by  the  Indians  before  Jackson  migrated  to  Tennes- 
see.4 Jackson  boarded  with  the  widow  Donelson. 
In  the  family  there  were  also  Mrs.  Donelson's 
daughter,  Rachel,  and  the  latter's  husband,  Lewis 
Robards.  Robards,  who  seems  to  have  been  of  a 
violent  and  jealous  disposition,  had  made  injurious 
charges  against  his  wife  with  reference  to  other 
persons,  and  he  now  made  such  charges  with  refer- 
ence to  Jackson.  Robards  had  been  married  in 
Kentucky  under  Virginia  law.  There  was  no  law 

1  He  was  appointed  district  attorney  by  Washington  in  1791, 
after  the  western  counties  of  North  Carolina  were  ceded.     The 
cession  was  made  that  the  State  might  no  longer  be  obliged  to 
pay  expenses  incurred  in  Indian  wars,  which  the  western  people 
were  charged  with  provoking  in  order  to  create  claims  which  the 
eastern  counties  must  pay.   Hayward,  214  ;  Allison,  26. 

2  Putnam,  351. 
8  Chap.  iii. 

4  Putnam,  613  et  seq. ;  Kirke,  7. 


12  ANDREW  JACKSON 

of  divorce  in  Virginia.  Robards,  in  1790,  peti- 
tioned the  Legislature  of  Virginia  to  pass  an  act 
of  divorce  in  his  favor,  making  an  affidavit  that 
his  wife  had  deserted  him,  and  was  living  in  adul- 
tery with  Jackson.  The  Legislature  of  Virginia 
passed  an  act  authorizing  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Kentucky  to  try  the  case  with  a  jury,  and,  if  the 
facts  proved  to  be  as  alleged,  to  grant  a  divorce.1 
Robards  took  no  action  for  two  years.  September 
27,  1793,  he  obtained  a  divorce  from  the  Court  of 
Quarter  Sessions  of  Mercer  County,  Kentucky.2 
In  the  mean  time,  Jackson  and  Mrs.  Robards,  upon 
information  of  the  legislative  act  of  1790,  which 
they  assumed,  or  were  informed,  to  be  an  act  of 
divorce,  were  married  at  Natchez,  in  July  or  Au- 
gust, 1791.  In  January,  1794,  upon  hearing  of 
the  action  of  the  Mercer  County  Court,  they  were 
married  again.3  The  circumstances  of  this  mar- 
riage were  such  as  to  provoke  scandal  at  the  time, 
and  the  scandal,  which  in  the  case  of  a  more  ob- 
scure man  would  have  died  out  during  thirty  years 
of  honorable  wedlock,  came  up  over  and  over  again 
during  Jackson's  career.  It  is  plain  that  Jackson 
himself  was  to  blame  for  contracting  a  marriage 
under  ambiguous  circumstances,  and  for  not  pro- 
tecting his  own  wife's  honor  by  proper  precautions, 

1  13  Va.  Stat.  at  Large,  227 ;  Dec.  20,  1790. 

2  The  decree  was  for  desertion  and  adultery.     It  is  given  in 
full  in  Truth's  Advocate,  17.     (1828.) 

8  Telegraph  Extra,  p.  33.     Report  of  a  Jackson  committee  in 
1828. 


JACKSON'S  MARRIAGE  13 

such  as  finding  out  the  exact  terms  of  the  act  of 
the  Legislature  of  Virginia.  He  clung  to  this  lady 
until  her  death,  with  rare  single-minded  ness  and 
devotion,  although  she  was  not  at  all  fitted  to  share 
the  destiny  which  befell  him.  He  cherished  her 
memory  until  his  own  death  in  a  fashion  of  high 
romance.  An  imputation  upon  her,  or  a  reflection 
upon  the  regularity  of  his  marriage,  always  incensed 
him  more  than  any  other  personal  attack.  Having 
put  her  in  a  false  position,  against  which,  as  man 
and  lawyer,  he  should  have  protected  her,  he  was 
afterward  led,  by  his  education  and  the  current 
ways  of  thinking  in  the  society  about  him,  to  try 
to  heal  the  defects  in  his  marriage  certificate  by 
shooting  any  man  who  dared  to  state  the  truth; 
that  said  certificate  was  irregular. 

Jackson  was  a  member  of  the  convention  which 
met  at  Knoxville,  January  11,  1796,  and  framed  a 
Constitution  for  the  State  of  Tennessee.  There  is 
a  tradition  that  he  proposed  the  name  of  the  river 
as  the  name  of  the  State.1  This  Constitution  estab- 
lished a  freehold  qualification  for  voting  and  hold- 
ing the  chief  offices,  and  declared  that  the  people 
of  Tennessee  had  an  inalienable  right  to  navigate 
the  Mississippi  river  to  its  mouth.  The  federalists 
in  Congress  opposed  the  admission  of  Tennessee, 
because  it  was  a  raw  frontier  community ;  but  it 
was  admitted  June  1,  1796.  In  the  autumn  Jack- 
son was  elected  the  first  federal  representative.  A 
year  later,  Blount,  one  of  the  senators  from  Ten- 

i  Ramsey,  655. 


14  ANDREW  JACKSON 

wessee,  having  been  expelled,  Jackson  was  ap- 
pointed senator  in  his  place.  He  held  this  position 
only  until  April,  1798,  when  he  resigned. 

In  December,  1796,  therefore,  at  the  age  of 
thirty,  Jackson  first  came  in  contact  with  a  society 
as  cultivated  as  that  of  Philadelphia  then  was. 
Except  for  the  brief  visit  to  Charleston  in  1783, 
above  referred  to,  he  had  seen  no  society  but  that 
of  western  North  Carolina  and  Tennessee.  He 
came  to  Philadelphia  just  as  the  presidential  elec- 
tion of  1796  was  being  decided.  Tennessee  voted 
for  Jefferson,  and  we  may  believe  that  whatever 
political  notions  Jackson  had  were  Jeffersonian. 
He  identified  himself  with  the  opposition  to  Wash- 
ington's administration  in  the  most  factious  and 
malicious  act  which  it  perpetrated,  namely,  the 
vote  against  the  address  to  Washington  at  the 
close  of  his  administration.  He  and  Edward  Liv- 
ingston were  two  out  of  twelve  in  the  House  who 
refused  to  vote  for  the  address.  It  is  not  known 
what  Jackson's  reasons  were.  Some  refused  to 
vote  -that  Washington's  administration  had  been 
wise.  Others  objected  to  the  hope  that  Washing- 
ton's example  would  guide  his  successors.1  The 
grounds  of  objection  to  the  administration  were 
Jay's  treaty  and  Hamilton's  financial  measures.  In 
the  light  of  history  the  "  irreconcilable  "  minority 
which  opposed  these  measures  to  the  bitter  end 
must  stand  condemned. 

1  In  1830  Livingston  attempted  an  elaborate  defence  of  his 
vote.  He  tried  to  distinguish  between  Washington  and  his  ad- 
ministration. Hunt's  Livingston,  340. 


EARLY  POLITICAL  OPINIONS  15 

In  the  Senate,  Jackson  voted,  with  only  two 
others,  against  a  bill  to  authorize  the  President  to 
buy  or  lease  cannon  foundries,  in  view  of  possible 
war  with  France.  He  voted  against  a  bill  to  au- 
thorize the  arming  of  merchant  ships  ;  in  favor  of 
an  embargo;  against  a  proviso  that  the  United 
States  should  not  be  bound  to  cancel  the  Indian 
title  to  land  on  behalf  of  any  State.1 

We  know  nothing  of  any  activity  or  interest 
shown  by  Jackson  in  any  measure  save  a  claim  of 
Hugh  L.  White,  and  an  act  to  reimburse  Tennessee 
for  expenses  incurred  in  an  Indian  war.  Tennessee 
thought  that  the  federal  government  was  slow  and 
negligent  about  defending  her  against  the  Indians. 
The  federal  government  thought  that  Tennessee 
was  hasty  and  aggressive  towards  the  Indians.  It 
had  inherited  the  burden  against  which  North  Car- 
olina had  revolted.2  Jackson  secured  payment  of 
this  claim  of  Tennessee  while  he  was  in  the  House, 
to  the  great  advantage  of  his  popularity  at  home. 

We  must  infer  from  his  conduct  that  he  did  not 
enjoy  political  life  and  did  not  care  for  it.  He 
certainly  did  not  become  engaged  in  it  at  all,  and  he 
formed  no  ties  which  he  found  it  hard  to  break  at 
a  moment's  warning.  He  does  not  appear  to  have 
made  much  impression  upon  anybody  at  Philadel- 
phia. In  the  "History  of  the  United  States  in 
1796  "  (p.  244)  he  is  quoted  for  an  account  of 
the  Nickajack  expedition,  against  the  Indian  strong- 

1  Annals  of  Congress  ;  5th  Congress,  I.  485-532. 

2  See  p.  ll,n.l. 


16  ANDREW  JACKSON 

hold,  in  1794.  Gallatin  recalled  him  years  after- 
wards as  "  a  tall,  lank,  uncouth-looking  personage, 
with  long  locks  of  hair  hanging  over  his  face,  and 
a  cue  down  his  back  tied  in  an  eel-skin ;  his  dress 
singular,  his  manners  and  deportment  that  of  a 
rough  backwoodsman."  l  Jefferson  said  of  him,  in 
1824 :  "  When  I  was  President  of  the  Senate  he 
was  a  senator,  and  he  could  never  speak  on  account 
of  the  rashness  of  his  feelings.  I  have  seen  him  at- 
tempt  it  repeatedly,  and  as  often  choke  with  rage."  2 
There  is,  however,  ample  testimony  that  Jackson, 
later  in  life,  was  distinguished  and  elegant  in  his 
bearing,  when  he  did  not  affect  roughness  and  in- 
elegance, and  that  he  was  able  to  command  enco- 
miums upon  his  manners  from  the  best  bred  ladies 
in  the  country. 

Jackson  was  a  "  Judge  of  the  Superior  Courts  " 
of  Tennessee  from  1798  to  June  1804.  Overton's 
Reports  (1  Tennessee)  cover  this  period,  but  the 
reports  are  meagre  and  undated  (beginning  in 
1791),  and  those  which  appear  to  belong  to  Jack- 
son's time  deal  with  only  petty  and  unimportant 
cases.  It  is  stated  here  that  he  resigned,  "  having 
been  previously  appointed  a  general  of  the  militia." 

While  Jackson  was  on  the  bench,  he  and  ex-Gov- 
ernor Sevier  were  in  feud  with  each  other.  The 
origin  of  the  quarrel  is  obscure,  and  not  worth 
picking  out  from  the  contradictory  backwoods  gos- 
sip in  which  it  probably  originated.  It  is  enough 
to  notice  that  the  two  men  were  too  much  alike  i» 
1 4  Hildreth,  692.  2  Webster's  Corr.  371. 


MAJOR-GENERAL  OF  MILITIA  17 

temper  to  be  pleased  with  each  other.  Sevier  was 
fifty-seven  years  old  in  1801,  and  had  been  a  lead- 
ing man  in  the  country  for  twenty  years.  Jackson 
was  only  thirty-four  in  that  year,  and  a  rising  man, 
whose  success  interfered  with  Sevier's  plans  for 
himself.  In  1802  the  field  officers  of  the  militia 
tried  to  elect  a  major-general.  Sevier  and  Jackson 
were  the  candidates.  The  election  resulted  in  a 
tie.  The  governor,  Archibald  Roane,  who  had  the 
casting  vote,  threw  it  for  Jackson.  Jackson  had 
not  taken  part  in  the  Nickajack  expedition,  or 
otherwise  done  military  service,  so  far  as  is  known, 
except  as  a  private  in  an  Indian  fight  in  1789. 
On  that  occasion  one  of  his  comrades  described 
him  as  "  bold,  dashing,  fearless,  and  mad  upon  his 
enemies."  1  In  1803  Sevier  was  elected  governor, 
and  he  and  the  judge-major-general  drew  their 
weapons  on  each  other  when  they  met.  Each  had 
his  faction  of  adherents,  and  it  was  only  by  the 
strenuous  efforts  of  these  persons  that  they  were 
prevented  from  doing  violence  to  each  other.  Ken- 
dall says  that  Jackson's  popularity  was  increased 
by  his  quarrel  with  Sevier. 2  Parton  gives  letters 
of  Jackson  from  this  period  which  are  astonishingly 
illiterate  for  a  man  in  his  position,  even  when  all 
the  circumstances  are  taken  into  consideration. 
Jackson  was  made  a  trustee  of  the  Nashville  Acad- 
emy in  1793.3 

He  wanted  to  be  made  governor  of  the  Territory 
of  Orleans  after  the  purchase,  and  the  Tennessee 

l  Putnam,  318.       2  Kendall's  Jackson,  108.       3  Putnam,  410. 


18  ANDREW  JACKSON 

delegation  urged  Jefferson  to  appoint  him.  A 
letter  from  William  Henderson  of  Sumner  County, 
Tennessee,  has  been  published,  which  was  written 
to  dissuade  the  President  from  this  appointment. 
I  "  view  him  as  a  man  of  violent  passions,  arbitrary 
in  his  disposition,  and  frequently  engaged  in  broils 
and  disputes.  .  .  .  He  is  a  man  of  talents,  and, 
were  it  not  for  those  despotic  principles,  he  might 
be  a  useful  man."  1 

In  1804  Jackson  was  once  more  a  private  citizen, 
a  planter,  and  a  store-keeper.  Neither  politics  nor 
law  had  apparently  touched  any  chord  of  interest 
in  him.  The  turning  point  in  his  career  was  the 
vote  which  made  him  major-general  of  militia,  but 
the  time  had  not  yet  arrived  for  him  to  show  that 
all  there  was  in  him  could  be  aroused  when  there 
were  public  enemies  to  be  crushed.  He  Lad  been 
engaged  in  trade  for  six  years  or  more  before  1804, 
and  was  now  embarrassed.  He  devoted  himself  to 
business  for  several  years. 

Mention  has  already  been  made  of  the  gen- 
eral abuse  of  credit  in  the  frontier  communities. 
Money  is  scarce  because  capital  is  scarce,  and  is  so 
much  needed  that  the  community  is  unwilling  to 
employ  any  of  it  in  securing  a  value  currency.  It 
is  true  that  the  people  always  have  to  pay  for  a 
value  currency,  whether  they  get  it  or  not,  but  they 
always  cheat  themselves  with  the  notion  that  cheap 
money  is  cheap.  Food  and  fuel  are  abundant,  but 
everything  else  is  scarce  and  hard  to  get.  Hopes 
1  N.  Y.  Times,  Dec.  26,  1897. 


FRONTIER  CODE  19 

are  strong  and  expectations  are  great.  Each  man 
gives  his  note,  which  is  a  draft  on  the  glorious 
future ;  that  is,  every  man  makes  his  own  currency 
as  he  wants  it,  and  the  freedom  with  which  he 
draws  his  drafts  is  as  unlimited  as  his  own  sanguine 
hopes.  The  hopes  are  not  unfounded,  but  their 
fruition  is  often  delayed.  Continued  renewals  be- 
come necessary,  and  liquidation  is  put  off  until  no 
man  knows  where  he  stands.  A  general  liquida- 
tion, with  a  period  of  reaction  and  stagnation, 
therefore,  ensues  upon  any  shock  to  credit.  In 
Tennessee,  between  1790  and  1798,  land  was  used 
as  a  kind  of  currency ;  prices  were  set  in  it,  and  it 
was  transferred  in  payment  for  goods  and  services. 
During  the  same  period  there  was  a  great  specula- 
tion in  new  land  throughout  the  country.  Prices 
of  land  were  inflated,  and  extravagant  notions  of 
the  value  of  raw  land  prevailed.  After  the  crisis 
of  1798,  land  fell  in  value  all  over  the  country,  to 
the  ruin  of  thousands  of  speculators.  Values  mea- 
sured in  land  all  collapsed  at  the  same  time.  Jack- 
son was  entangled  in  the  system  of  credit  and  land 
investments,  but  he  seems  to  have  worked  out  of 
his  embarrassments  during  the  next  three  or  four 
years,  after  which  he  abandoned  trade  and  became 
a  planter  only. 

Another  feature  of  this  early  southwestern  fron- 
tier society  which  excites  the  surprise  and  contempt 
of  the  modern  reader  is,  that  store-keepers  and 
farmers  and  lawyers,  who  lived  by  their  labor,  and 
had  wives  and  children  dependent  on  them,  are 


20  ANDREW  JACKSON 

found  constantly  quarrelling,  and  in  all  their  quar- 
rels are  found  mouthing  the  "  code  of  honor."  The 
earlier  backwoodsmen  quarrelled  and  fought  as 
above  described,  but  they  fought  with  fists  and 
knives,  on  the  spur  of  the  moment,  as  the  quarrel 
arose.  It  was  a  genteel  step  in  advance,  and 
marked  a  new  phase  of  society,  when  the  code  of 
the  pistol  came  into  use,  and  the  new  higher  social 
caste  prided  itself  not  a  little  on  being  "gentle- 
men," because  they  kept  up  in  the  backwoods  a 
caricature  drawn  by  tradition  and  hearsay  from 
the  manners  of  the  swaggerers  about  the  courts  of 
France  and  England  a  century  before.  Andrew 
Jackson  was  a  child  of  this  society,  an  adherent  of 
its  doctrines,  and  in  his  turn  a  propagandist  and 
expounder  of  them.  He  proved  himself  a  quarrel- 
some man.  Instead  of  making  peace  he  exhausted 
all  the  chances  of  conflict  which  offered  themselves. 
He  was  remarkably  genial  and  gentle  when  things 
went  on  to  suit  him,  and  when  he  was  satisfied 
with  his  companions.  He  was  very  chivalrous 
about  taking  up  the  cause  of  any  one  who  was 
unjustly  treated  and  was  dependent.  Yet  he  was 
combative,  and  pugnacious,  and  over-ready  to  ad- 
just  himself  for  a  hostile  collision  whenever  there 
was  any  real  or  fancied  occasion.  The  society  in 
which  he  lived  developed,  by  its  fashions,  some  of 
his  natural  faults. 

In  1795  he  fought  a  duel  with  a  fellow  lawyer 
named  Avery,  over  some  sparring  which  had  taken 
place  between  them  in  a  court  room,  when  they 


DUEL  WITH  CHARLES  DICKINSON          21 

were  opposing  counsel.  His  quarrel  with  Sevier 
has  been  mentioned.  While  on  the  bench  he  also 
quarrelled  with  his  old  friend  Judge  McNairy,  on 
account  of  an  appointment  made  by  the  judge 
which  injured  an  old  friend  of  both.1  In  1806  he 
fought  a  duel  with  Charles  Dickinson,  who  had 
spoken  disparagingly  of  Mrs.  Jackson  in  the  course 
of  a  long  quarrel  which  involved,  besides  Jackson, 
three  or  four  others,  and  which  was  a  capital  speci- 
men of  the  quarrels  stirred  up  by  the  gossip  and 
backbiting  of  men  who  had  too  much  leisure.  This 
was  the  real  cause  of  Jackson's  anger,  although  on 
the  surface  the  quarrel  was  about  a  strained  and 
artificial  question  of  veracity  concerning  a  bet  on 
a  horse-race,  and  it  was  inflamed  by  some  sarcastic 
letter-writing  in  the  local  newspaper,  and  by  some 
insulting  epithets.  Jackson's  friends  declared  that 
there  was  a  plot  to  drive  Jackson  out  of  the  coun- 
try. Each  man  meant  to  kill  the  other.  They 
met  May  30,  1806.  Jackson  was  wounded  by  a 
bullet  which  grazed  his  breast  and  weakened  him 
for  life.  Dickinson  was  mortally  wounded,  and 
died  the  same  evening.  Jackson  told  General  Hard- 
ing that  he  was  afraid  of  Dickinson,  who  was  a 
good  shot.  He  also  affirmed  that  he  had  not  an 
ungovernable  temper,  but  often  pretended  that  he 
had,  for  effect.2  Many  persons  who  were  intimate 
with  him  later  believed  that  this  was  true. 

Jackson   had   made   the  acquaintance  of   Burr 

1  Kendall's  Jackson,  105. 

2  2  Southern  Bivouac,  667. 


22  ANDREW  JACKSON 

when  in  Congress.  In  1805  Burr  visited  Jackson, 
and  made  a  contract  with  him  for  boats  for  the 
expedition  down  the  Mississippi.  The  people  of 
Kentucky  and  Tennessee  had  always  regarded  it 
as  a  vital  interest  of  theirs  to  have  the  free  naviga- 
tion of  the  Mississippi.  They  believed  that  all 
Indian  hostilities  were  incited  by  the  Spaniards  at 
New  Orleans.1  So  long  as  a  foreign  power  held 
the  mouth  of  the  river,  plots  were  formed  for  sep- 
arating the  trans- Alleghany  country  from  the  At- 
lantic States,  the  strength  of  which  plots  lay  in 
the  fact  that  the  tie  of  interest  which  made  the 
basis  of  a  union  with  the  holder  of  New  Orleans 
was  stronger  than  the  tie  of  interest  which  united 
the  two  sides  of  the  Alleghanies.2  In  1795  the 
United  States  by  treaty  with  Spain  secured  a  right 
of  deposit  at  New  Orleans  for  three  years,  and 
these  separation  plots  lost  all  their  strength.  The 
"  Annual  Register  "  for  1796  (anti-federalist)  very 
pertinently  pointed  out  to  the  western  people  the 
advantages  they  enjoyed  from  the  Union.  "  If 
they  had  been  formed  into  an  independent  republic, 
the  court  of  Madrid  would  have  scorned  to  grant 
such  a  free  navigation " 3  (i.  e.,  as  it  granted  in 
the  treaty  of  1795).  Spain  ceded  Louisiana  to 
France  by  the  secret  treaty  of  St.  Ildefonso,  Octo- 
ber 1,  1800.  This  treaty  became  known  in  1802 
after  the  peace  of  Amiens.  In  the  same  year 

1  Haywood's  Tennessee,  passim  ;  Allison,  91. 

2  Butler's  Kentucky,  chap,  xi ;  Allison,  89,  92. 
8  Ann.  Eeg.  (1796)  p.  83. 


WESTERN  FEELING  ABOUT  LOUISIANA     23 

Spain,  which,  still  held  possession  of  Louisiana, 
withdrew  the  right  of  deposit,  and  the  western 
country  was  thrown  into  great  excitement.  In 
1803  the  whole  matter  of  the  navigation  of  the 
Mississippi  was  settled  by  the  purchase  of  Louis- 
iana by  the  United  States,  but  then  a  new  set 
of  questions  was  opened.  In  the  treaty  of  1795 
Spain  had  acknowledged  the  parallel  of  31°  as  the 
boundary  of  Florida  from  the  Mississippi  to  the 
Chattahoochee,  although  she  had  been  slow  about 
surrendering  posts  held  by  her  north  of  this  line 
and  east  of  the  Mississippi.  Hence  there  had  been 
complaints  and  bad  feeling.  Now  a  new  question 
arose  as  to  how  far  Louisiana  extended  east  of  the 
Mississippi  river,  and  this  question  was  of  great 
importance  to  the  Gulf  territories,  because  if,  by 
the  Louisiana  purchase,  the  United  States  had 
become  owner  of  the  territory  east  as  far  as  thf 
Perdido,  then  the  Gulf  coast,  with  the  valuable 
harbor  of  Mobile,  was  available  for  the  whole 
Southwest.  Spain  denied  that  Louisiana  included 
anything  east  of  the  Mississippi  except  the  city  of 
New  Orleans,  and  the  bit  of  territory  south  and 
west  of  the  Iberville  and  the  two  lakes.1  The 
territory  remained  in  dispute,  and  the  relations 
between  the  two  countries  continued  to  be  bad, 
until  Florida  was  purchased  in  1819.  In  1802  a 
treaty  was  made  with  Spain  for  the  payment  by 
her  of  claims  held  by  American  citizens,  but  Spain 

1  See  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 
in  Foster  v.  Neilson,  2  Peters,  253. 


24  ANDREW  JACKSON 

did  not  ratify  the  treaty  until  1818.  She  had  her 
grievances  also,  at  first  about  Miranda's  expedition, 
and  afterwards  about  aid  to  her  revolted  colonies. 
In  1810  the  President  ordered  the  Governor  of 
Orleans  to  occupy  the  territory  as  far  as  the  Per- 
dido,  and  to  hold  it  in  peace  and  order,  subject  to 
the  final  decision  of  the  pending  controversy  with 
Spain.  In  1812,  Congress,  by  two  acts,  divided 
the  country  east  as  far  as  the  Perdido  into  two 
parts,  and  added  one  part  to  Louisiana,  which  was 
admitted  as  a  State,  and  the  other  part  to  the 
Mississippi  territory. 

It  has  seemed  convenient  to  pursue  these  pro- 
ceedings up  to  this  point,  because  future  reference 
to  them  will  be  necessary.  To  return  now  to 
Burr  and  his  expedition :  —  It  will  be  understood 
what  were  the  relations  of  the  United  States  to 
Spain  in  1805  and  1806,  and  especially  what  part 
of  those  relations  peculiarly  affected  the  people  of 
the  Southwest  at  that  time.  Their  collisions  with 
Spain  no  longer  concerned  New  Orleans,  but  West 
Florida  and  Mobile.  It  is  still  a  mystery  what 
Burr  really  intended.1  Napoleon's  career  had  fired 
the  imagination  of  men  of  a  military  and  romantic 
turn  all  over  the  world.  It  is  quite  as  reasonable 
an  explanation  of  Burr's  scheme  as  any  other  that 
he  was  reserving  all  his  chances,  and  meant  to  do 
much  or  little,  according  to  the  turn  of  events, 
and  that  he  did  not  himself  define  to  himself  what 
he  was  aiming  at.  His  project  had  an  unmistak- 
1  Safford's  Blennerhasset ;  2  Amer.  Whig  Rev.  No.  2. 


BURR'S  SCHEMES  25 

able  kinship  with  the  old  plans  for  setting  up  a 
republic  of  the  Mississippi,  with  its  capital  at  New 
Orleans.1  For  that,  however,  he  was  ten  years  too 
late.  If  he  had  intended  to  go  on  a  filibustering 
expedition  against  the  Spaniards  in  Mexico,  he 
would  have  obtained  secret  aid  and  sympathy  in 
Kentucky  and  Tennessee,  and  the  aid  which  he 
did  get  was  given  under  that  belief.2  If  his  scheme 
was  aimed  in  any  manner  against  the  United  States 
he  could  not  find  any  aid  for  it.  Since  the  pur- 
chase of  Louisiana,  and  the  accession  to  power  in 
the  Union  of  the  party  to  which  the  great  majority 
of  the  western  people  belonged,  there  was  no  feel- 
ing for  Burr  to  work  on.3 

In  1805  Burr  found  a  cordial  welcome  and  aid. 
He  was  evidently  trying  to  use  Jackson  without 
startling  him.  His  letter  of  March  24, 1806,  which 
Parton  gives,4  is  a  very  crafty  letter,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  engaging  Jackson's  name  and  influence  to 
raise  troops  for  his  enterprise  without  defining  it. 
In  1806  Burr  was  again  in  Nashville.  His  pro- 
ceedings then  aroused  suspicion.  It  appears  that 
Jackson  was  mystified.  He  did  not  know  whether 
he  ought  to  aid  Burr  or  oppose  him,  or  aid  him 
secretly  and  oppose  him  openly.  It  seems  to  be 
very  clear,  however,  that  he  took  sides  against 
Burr,  if  Burr  was  against  the  United  States.  Jan- 

1  2  Wilkinson,  196 ;  Gayarre,  Louisiana  under  Spanish  Domin- 
ion ;  2  Pickett,  ch.  xxix. 

2  2  Amer.  Eeg.  (1807)  103,  note. 

8  Cf.  Jefferson's  Message  of  January  22,  1807. 
*  1  Parton,  313. 


26  ANDREW  JACKSON 

uary  15th  he  wrote  to  Campbell,  member  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  and  gave  November  as 
the  time  when  he  first  heard  of  a  plan  to  seize 
New  Orleans,  conquer  Mexico,  carry  away  the 
Western  States,  and  set  up  a  great  empire.1  He 
says  that  he  was  indignant  at  being  the  dupe  of 
such  an  enterprise,  and  that  he  called  Burr  to 
account.  Burr  denounced  and  ridiculed  the  notion 
that  he  intended  anything  hostile  to  the  United 
States.2  He  claimed  to  have  the  secret  countenance 
of  the  Secretary  of  War.  It  seems  that  Jackson 
must  have  been  convinced  afterwards  that  Burr 
had  been  calumniated  and  unjustly  treated.  He 
was  at  Richmond  as  a  witness  in  Burr's  trial. 
He  there  made  a  public  speech  against  Jefferson. 
Jackson  had  previously  been  ill-disposed  towards 
Jefferson  because  Jefferson  did  not  give  him  the 
office  of  Governor  of  Orleans.  Jackson's  strong 
personal  contempt  and  dislike  for  General  Wilkin- 
son, the  commander  at  New  Orleans,  who  appeared 
as  Burr's  accuser,  also  influenced  his  judgment.3 
Throughout  his  life  he  was  unable  to  form  an  un- 
biassed opinion  on  a  question  of  fact  or  law,  if  he 
had  any  personal  relations  of  friendship  or  enmity 
with  the  parties. 

From  1806  to  1811  Jackson  appears  to  have  led 

1  Telegraph  Extra,  481  et  seq. 

2  When  Burr  was  arrested  in  Kentucky  he  gave  his  word  of 
honor  to  his  counsel  that  he  intended  nothing  against  the  United 
States.     Kendall's  Jackson,  120. 

8  His  hatred  of  Wilkinson  was  greatly  strengthened  after- 
wards, but  he  shows  it,  and  the  influence  of  it,  in  his  letter  to 
Campbell. 


SILAS  DINSMORE  27 

the  life  of  a  planter  without  any  noticeable  incident. 
The  next  we  hear  of  him,  however,  he  is  committing 
another  act  of  violence.  Silas  Din sm ore,  the  In- 
dian agent,  refused  to  allow  persons  to  pass  through 
the  Indian  country  with  negroes,  unless  they  had 
passports  for  the  negroes.  It  was  his  duty  by  law 
to  enforce  this  rule.  There  were  complaints  that 
negroes  ran  away  or  were  stolen.  His  regulation, 
however,  interfered  with  the  trade  in  negroes.  This 
trade  was  then  regarded  as  dishonorable.  It  has 
been  charged  that  Jackson  was  engaged  in  it,  and 
the  facts  very  easily  bear  that  color.  He  passed 
through  the  Indian  country  with  some  negroes 
without  hindrance,  because  Dinsmore  was  away, 
but  he  took  up  the  quarrel  with  the  agent,  and 
wrote  to  Campbell  to  tell  the  Secretary  of  War 
that,  if  Dinsmore  was  not  removed,  the  people  of 
West  Tennessee  would  burn  him  in  his  own  agency. 
There  is  a  great  deal  of  fire  in  the  letter,  and  not 
a  little  about  liberty  and  free  government.1  Dins- 
more  was  suspended,  and  things  took  such  a  turn 
that  he  lost  his  position  and  was  reduced  to  pov- 
erty. Parton  gives  a  story  of  an  attempt  by  Dins- 
more,  eight  years  later,  to  conciliate  Jackson.  This 
attempt  was  dignified,  yet  courteous  and  becoming. 
Jackson  repelled  it  in  a  very  brutal  and  low-bred 
manner.  Dinsmore  did  not  know  until  1828,  when 
he  was  a  petitioner  at  Washington,  and  the  papers 
were  called  for,  that  Jackson  had  been  the  cause 

ruin.2 

34  Niles,  110.  *  8  Adams,  61. 


28  ANDREW  JACKSON 

The  time  was  now  at  hand,  however,  when  An- 
drew Jackson  would  have  a  chance  to  show  how  he 
could  serve  his  country.  At  the  age  of  forty-five 
he  had  commenced  no  career.  He  was  a  promi- 
nent man  in  his  State,  but  he  had  held  no  political 
offices  in  it,  and  had  not,  so  far  as  we  know,  been 
active  in  any  kind  of  public  affairs,  although  we 
infer  that  he  had  discharged  all  his  duties  as  gen- 
eral of  militia.  He  had  shown  himself  a  faithful 
friend  and  an  implacable  enemy.  Every  man  who 
has  this  character  is  self-centred.  He  need  not  be 
vain  or  conceited.  Jackson  was  not  vain  or  con- 
ceited. He  never  showed  any  marked  selfishness. 
He  had  a  great  deal  of  amour  propre.  All  things 
which  interested  him  at  all  took  on  some  relation 
to  his  person,  and  he  engaged  his  personality  in 
everything  which  interested  him.  An  opinion  or  a 
prejudice  became  at  once  for  him  a  personal  right 
and  interest.  To  approve  it  and  further  it  was 
to  win  his  gratitude  and  friendship.  To  refute  or 
oppose  it  was  to  excite  his  animosity.  There  was 
an  intensity  and  vigor  about  him  which  showed 
lack  of  training.  His  character  had  never  been 
cultivated  by  the  precepts  and  discipline  of  home, 
or  by  the  discipline  of  a  strict  and  close  society,  in 
which  extravagances  of  behavior  and  excess  of 
amour  propre  are  promptly  and  severely  restrained 
by  harsh  social  penalties.  There  is,  to  be  sure,  a 
popular  philosophy  that  home  breeding  and  culture 
are  of  no  importance.  The  fact,  however,  is  not  to 
be  gainsaid  that  true  honor,  truthfulness,  suppres- 


STRONG  PERSONAL  FEELING  29 

sion  of  undue  personal  feeling,  self-control,  and 
courtesy  are  inculcated  best,  if  not  exclusively,  by 
the  constant  precept  and  example,  in  earliest  child- 
hood, of  high-bred  parents  and  relatives.  There  is 
nothing  on  earth  which  it  costs  more  labor  to  pro- 
duce than  a  high-bred  man.  It  is  also  indisputable 
that  home  discipline  and  training  ingrain  into  the 
character  of  men  the  most  solid  and  valuable  ele- 
ments, and  that,  without  such  training,  more  civili- 
zation means  better  food  and  clothes  rather  than 
'better  men.  It  is  characteristic  of  barbarians  to 
put  their  personality  always  at  stake,  and  not  to 
(distinguish  the  man  who  disputes  their  notions 
from  the  man  who  violates  their  rights.  It  is  pos- 
sible, however,  that  the  military  virtues  may  flour- 
ish where  moral  and  social  training  are  lacking. 
Jackson  was  unfortunate  in  that  the  force  of  his 
will  and  the  energy  of  his  executive  powers  had 
never  been  disciplined,  but  the  outbreak  of  the 
second  war  with  England  afforded  him  an  arena  on 
which  his  faults  became  virtues. 


CHAPTER  II 
THE  CREEK  WAR  AND  THE  WAR  WITH  ENGLAND 

IN  no  place  in  the  world  was  Napoleon  more 
ardently  admired  than  in  the  new  States  of  this 
country.  The  popular  enthusiasm  about  him  in 
those  States  lasted  long  after  he  was  rated  much 
more  nearly  at  his  true  value  everywhere  else  in 
the  world.  The  second  war  with  England  was 
brought  on  by  the  policy,  the  opinions,  and  the 
feelings  of  the  South  and  West,  represented  by 
a  young  and  radical  element  in  the  Jeffersonian 
party.  The  opinion  in  the  South  and  West,  in 
1811  and  1812,  was  that  Napoleon  was  about  to 
unite  the  Continent  for  an  attack  on  England,  in 
which  he  was  sure  to  succeed,  and  that  he  would 
thus  become  master  of  Europe  and  the  world. 
It  was  thought  that  it  would  be  well  to  be  in  at 
the  death  on  his  side.  It  is  not  necessary  to  point 
out  in  any  detail  the  grounds  for  this  opinion  which 
might  have  been  put  forward  at  that  time,  or  to 
show  the  partial  and  distorted  information  on  which 
it  was  founded.  It  is  certain  that  the  persons  who 
held  this  notion  were  very  ill-informed  on  Euro- 
pean politics,  and  their  opinions  were  strongly 
biassed  by  party  conflicts  at  home.  For  twenty 


JEFFERSON'S  POLICY  31 

years  the  domestic  politics  of  the  United  States 
had  been  organized  on  sympathy  with  one  or  the 
other  of  the  belligerent  parties  in  Europe.  This 
country  was  weak  in  a  military  point  of  view,  but 
commercially  it  would  have  been  a  great  advantage 
to  either  belligerent  to  have  free  intercourse  with 
the  United  States,  and  to  keep  his  enemy  from  it. 
The  English  policy  towards  the  United  States 
was  arrogant  and  insolent.  That  of  France  was 
marked  by  duplicity  and  chicanery.  Party  spirit 
here  took  possession  of  the  people  to  such  an  ex- 
tent that  the  federalists  made  apology  for  any 
injury  from  England,  no  matter  how  insolent,  and 
the  democrats  could  not  see  any  wrong  in  the  acts 
of  Napoleon,  in  spite  of  the  evident  fact  that  he 
was  using  this  country  for  his  own  selfish  purposes 
while  cajoling  it  with  shameless  lies.  The  course 
of  the  weak  neutral  between  two  such  belligerents 
was  very  difficult. 

Washington  succeeded  in  maintaining  neutrality 
by  Jay's  treaty,  but  at  the  cost  of  bitter  hostility 
at  home.  Adams  was  driven  to  the  verge  of  war 
with  France  by  his  party,  but  succeeded  in  avert- 
ing war,  although  his  party  was  destroyed  by  the 
reaction.  Jefferson  cannot  be  said  to  have  had 
any  plan.  The  statesmen  of  his  party  tried  to  act 
on  the  belligerents  by  destructive  measures  against 
domestic  commerce  and  industry,  chastising  our- 
selves, as  Plumer  said,  with  scorpions,  in  order  to 
beat  the  enemy  with  whips.  They  tried  one  mea- 
sure .after  another.  No  measure  had  a  rational 


32  ANDREW   JACKSON 

origin  or  effect  calculated  and  adjusted  to  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  case.  Each  was  a  new  blunder. 
The  republican  rulers  in  France,  in  1792,  could  do 
nothing  better  for  a  man  who  claimed  protection 
from  the  Jacobin  mobs  than  to  put  him  in  prison, 
so  that  the  mob  could  not  get  at  him.  Jefferson's 
embargo  offered  the  same  kind  of  protection  to 
American  shipping.  Before  the  embargo,  mer- 
chants and  ship-owners  went  to  sea  at  great  risk 
of  capture  and  destruction ;  after  it,  they  stayed 
at  home  and  were  sure  of  ruin.  Jefferson  has  re- 
mained a  popular  idol,  and  has  never  been  held  to 
the  responsibility  which  belonged  to  him  for  his, 
measures.  The  alien  and  sedition  laws  were  not 
nearly  so  unjust  and  tyrannical l  as  the  laws  for  en- 
forcing the  embargo,  and  they  did  not  touch  one 
man  where  the  embargo  laws  touched  hundreds. 
The  commercial  war  was  a  device  which,  if  it  had 
been  sensible  and  practical,  would  have  attained 
national  ends  by  sacrificing  one  group  of  interests 
and  laying  a  much  inferior  burden  on  others.  New 
England  was  denounced  for  want  of  patriotism  be- 
cause it  resisted  the  use  of  its  interests  for  national 
purposes,  but  as  soon  as  the  secondary  effects  of 
the  embargo  on  agriculture  began  to  be  felt,  the 
agricultural  States  raised  a  cry  which  overthrew 
the  device.  Yet  criticisms  which  are  justified  by 
the  most  conclusive  testimony  of  history  fall  harm- 
lessly from  Jefferson's  armor  of  popular  platitudes 

1  See  Carey's  Olive  Branch,  page  50,  for  the  opinion  of  a  demo- 
crat on  these  laws  after  party  spirit  had  cooled  down. 


CAUSE  OF  THE  SECOND  WAR  33 

and  democratic  sentiments.  He  showed  the  traits 
which  we  call  womanish.  He  took  counsel  of  his 
feelings  and  imagination ;  he  planned  measures  like 
the  embargo,  whose  scope  and  effect  he  did  not  un- 
derstand. He  was  fiery  when  deciding  initiatory 
steps,  like  the  rejection  of  the  English  treaty ;  vacil- 
lating and  timid  when  he  had  to  adopt  measures 
for  going  forward  in  the  path  which  he  had  chosen. 
His  diplomacy,  besides  being  open  to  the  charge 
that  it  was  irregular  and  unusual,  was  transparent 
and  easily  turned  to  ridicule.  It  was  a  diplomacy 
without  lines  of  reserve  or  alternatives,  so  that, 
in  a  certain  very  possible  contingency,  it  had  no 
course  open  to  it.  Jefferson  finally  dropped  the 
reins  of  government  in  despair,  and,  on  a  theory 
which  would  make  each  presidential  term  last  for 
three  years  and  eight  months,  with  an  interregnum 
of  four  months,  he  left  the  task  to  his  successor. 
He  had  succeeded  in  keeping  out  of  war  with 
either  belligerent,  but  he  had  shaken  the  Union  to 
its  foundations.  The  extremists  in  the  democratic 
party  now  came  forward,  and  began  to  push  Madi- 
son into  a  war  with  England,  as  the  extreme  fede- 
ralists had  pushed  Adams  into  war  with  France. 
Madison,  therefore,  had  to  inherit  the  consequences 
of  Jefferson's  policy.  An  adherent  of  Jefferson  de- 
scribes the  bequest  as  follows :  "  Jefferson's  honest 
experiment,  bequeathed  to  Madison,  to  govern 
without  army  or  navy,  and  resist  foreign  enemies 
without  war,  proved  total  failures,  more  costly  than 


34  ANDREW  JACKSON 

war  and  much  more  odious  to  the  people,  and  dan- 
gerous to  the  Union." 1 

The  young  and  radical  democrats,  amongst  whom 
Clay  was  prominent,  were  restive  under  the  pre- 
dominance of  the  older  generation  of  democrats 
of  revolutionary  fame,  and  their  favorites.  The 
young  democrats  wanted  to  come  forward  without 
the  patronage  of  the  Virginia  leaders.  The  presi- 
dential election  of  1812  was  the  immediate  occasion 
of  their  action.  The  Jeffersonian  policy  had  pro- 
duced irritation  at  home  and  humiliation  abroad. 
The  natural  consequence  was  a  strong  war  spirit. 
It  was  believed  that  the  country  would  not  really 
be  engaged  in  military  operations,  because  England 
would  be  fully  occupied  in  Europe ;  that  Canada 
could  be  conquered ;  that  we  should  come  in  on 
the  winning  side  at  the  catastrophe  of  the  great 
conflict  in  Europe ;  and  that  all  this  would  be  very 
popular  in  the  South  and  West.  Madison  was 
compelled  greatly  against  his  will  to  yield  to  the 
war  party,  as  a  condition  of  his  reelection.2  Eng- 
land pointed  out  that  Napoleon  had  not  complied 
with  the  terms  of  the  American  demands  on  both 
belligerents,  but  had  falsified  a  date  and  told  a 
lie.  She  withdrew  her  orders  in  council,  and  there 
remained  only  impressment  as  the  ostensible  cause 
of  war.  September  12,  1812,  Admiral  Warren 
offered  an  armistice.  Madison  refused  it  unless 
the  practice  of  impressment  was  suspended.  War- 

1  Ingersoll,  70. 

2  Statesman's  Manual,  348.     1  Colton'a  Clay^  161. 


JACKSON  VOLUNTEERS  36 

ren  had  not  power  to  agree  to  this.  For  purposes 
of  redress  the  war  was,  therefore,  unnecessary,  and 
the  United  States  was  duped  into  it  by  Napoleon, 
so  far  as  its  avowed  causes  were  concerned.1 

General  Jackson  offered  his  services,  with  those 
of  2500  volunteers,  as  soon  as  he  heard  of  the 
declaration  of  war.  January  7,  1813,  he  set  out 
under  orders  for  New  Orleans,  an  attack  on  that 
place  being  regarded  as  a  probable  movement  of 
the  enemy.  Jackson  threw  himself  into  the  busi- 
ness with  all  his  might,  and  at  once  displayed 
activity,  vigilance,  and  skill.  His  letter  to  the 
Secretary  of  War  when  he  started  shows  with  what 
enthusiasm  he  set  to  work.  He  assured  the  Secre- 
tary that  his  men  had  no  "  constitutional  scruples," 
but  would,  if  so  directed,  plant  the  American 
eagle  on  the  walls  of  Mobile,  Pensacola,  and  St. 
Augustine.  In  March  he  was  at  Natchez  engaged 
in  organizing  his  force,  and  waiting  for  orders. 
While  there  he  had  a  quarrel  with  General  Wil- 
kinson on  a  question  of  rank.  Thomas  H.  Benton, 
who  was  serving  under  Jackson,  thought  Jackson 
wrong  on  the  point  in  question.  This  produced 
discord  between  him  and  Jackson. 

Suddenly  Jackson  received  orders  to  dismiss  his 
troops,  as  it  did  not  appear  that  the  enemy  were 
intending  to  attack  New  Orleans.  He  was,  of 
course,  greatly  chagrined  at  this  order.  He  was 
also  enraged  at  the  idea  of  disbanding  his  men, 
without  pay  or  rations,  five  hundred  miles  from 
l  See  1  Gallatin's  Writings,  517 ;  2  ditto,  196,  211,  499. 


36  ANDREW  JACKSON 

home,  to  find  their  way  back  as  best  they  could. 
A  subsequent  order  repaired  part  of  this  error  by 
ordering  pay  and  rations,  but  Jackson  hired  trans- 
portation on  his  own  responsibility,  and  marched 
his  men  home  in  a  body.  Thomas  H.  Benton,  in 
June  following,  succeeded  in  obtaining  from  the 
federal  authorities  reimbursement  of  the  expenses 
which  Jackson  had  incurred. 

This  act  of  Benton  would  perhaps  have  extin- 
guished the  memory  of  the  trouble  about  rank  at 
Natchez,  but,  in  the  mean  time,  Jackson  had  stood 
second  to  another  man  in  a  duel  with  Jesse  Benton, 
brother  of  Thomas.  A  feud  was  speedily  created 
out  of  this  by  the  gossip  and  tale-bearing  already 
described.  Up  to  this  time  Jackson  had  had  as 
many  enemies  as  friends,  but  his  course  in  leading 
home  the  troops  from  Natchez  had  made  him  very 
popular.  His  conduct  in  acting  as  second  in  the 
duel,  although  chivalrous  in  one  point  of  view,  was 
overbearing  in  another.  He  threatened  to  horse- 
whip Thomas  Benton,  and  a  rencontre  between  him 
and  the  two  brothers  took  place  in  a  tavern  at 
Nashville.  Blows  and  shots  were  exchanged,  and 
Jackson  came  away  with  a  ball  in  his  shoulder, 
which  he  carried  for  twenty  years.  This  affair 
occurred  September  4,  181 3.1 

The  great  Indian  chief  Tecumseh  had  been  try- 
ing for  years  to  unite  all  the  red  men  against  the 
whites.2  There  would  have  been  an  Indian  war  if 
there  had  been  no  war  with  England,  but  the  latter 

1  Cf.  1  Sargent,  225.  2  Drake's  Tecumseh. 


THE  CREEK  WAR  37 

seemed  to  be  Tecumseh's  opportunity.  Among 
the  southwestern  Indians  he  found  acceptance  only 
with  the  Creeks,  who  were  already  on  the  verge  of 
civil  war,  because  some  wanted  to  adopt  civilized 
life,  and  others  refused.1  The  latter  became  the 
war  party,  under  Weatherford,  a  very  able  half- 
breed  chief.  The  first  outbreak  in  the  Southwest, 
although  there  had  been  some  earlier  hostilities, 
was  the  massacre  of  the  garrison  and  refugees  at 
Fort  Mims,  at  the  junction  of  the  Alabama  and 
Tombigbee  rivers,  August  30,  1813.  There  were 
553  persons  in  the  fort,  of  whom  only  five  or  six 
escaped.2  If  Tecumseh  had  lived,  and  if  the  Eng- 
lish had  been  able  to  give  their  attention  to  an 
alliance  with  him,  he  would  have  united  the  In- 
dians from  the  Lakes  to  the  Gulf,  and  the  "  young 
democrats  "  would  have  found  out  what  sort  of  a 
business  it  may  be  to  start  a  war  for  party  effect. 
The  result  of  the  massacre  at  Fort  Mims  was  that 
Alabama  was  almost  abandoned  by  whites.  Terror 
and  desire  for  revenge  took  possession  of  Georgia 
and  Tennessee.  September  25th,  the  Tennessee 
Legislature  voted  to  raise  men  and  money  to  aid 
the  people  of  the  Mississippi  territory  against  the 
Creeks.  Jackson  was  still  confined  to  his  bed  by 
the  wound  which  Benton  had  given  him.  He  and 
Cocke  were  the  two  major-generals  of  the  militia 
of  Tennessee.  They  concerted  measures.  As  soon 
as  he  possibly  could,  Jackson  took  the  field.  Geor« 

1  Folio  State  Papers,  1  Indian  Affairs,  845  fg. 

2  2  Pickett,  266. 


38  ANDREW  JACKSON 

gia  had  a  force  in  the  field  under  General  Floyd. 
General  Claiborne  was  acting  at  the  head  of  troops 
from  Louisiana  and  Mississippi.  This  Indian  wax- 
had  a  local  character  and  was  outside  the  fed- 
eral operations,  although  in  the  end  it  had  a  great 
effect  upon  them.  Up  to  this  time  little  had  been 
known  at  Washington  of  Jackson,  save  that  he 
had  been  a  friend  of  Burr,  an  enemy  of  Jefferson, 
and  that  he  had  just  acted  in  a  somewhat  in- 
subordinate manner  at  Natchez,  reflecting  on  the 
administration  and  winning  popularity  for  himself. 
The  Creek  war l  was  remarkable  for  three  things : 
(1)  the  quarrels  between  the  generals,  and  the 
want  of  concert  of  action  ;  (2)  lack  of  provisions  ; 
(3)  insubordination  in  the  ranks.  Partly  on  ac- 
count of  the  lack  of  provisions,  for  which  he  blamed 
General  Cocke  (as  it  appears,  unjustly),  Jackson 
fell  into  a  bitter  quarrel  with  his  colleague  and 
junior  officer.  The  lack  of  provisions,  and  con- 
sequent suffering  of  the  men,  was  one  cause  of 
insubordination  in  the  ranks,  but  the  chief  cause 
was  differences  as  to  the  term  of  enlistment.  The 
enlistment  was  generally  for  three  months,  and 
constant  recruiting  was  necessary  to  keep  up  the 
army  in  the  field.  A  great  deal  of  nonsense  has 
been  written  and  spoken  about  pioneer  troops. 
Such  troops  were  always  insubordinate  2  and  home- 

1  See  Eaton's  Jackson  and  Pickett's  Alabama.     On  Tecumseh 
and  the  Prophet  see  Smithsonian  Eep.  1885,  Pt.  ii.  p.  200.     The 
Prophet  is  described  there  as  a  vain  sneak. 

2  See  descriptions  of  Kentucky  militia  in  Kendall's  Autobio* 


ANNOYANCES  IN  THE  FIELD  39 

sick,  and  very  dependent  for  success  on  enthusiasm 
for  their  leader  and  a  prosperous  course  of  affairs. 
For  these  reasons  the  character  of  the  commander 
was  all-important  to  such  an  army.  On  three  oc- 
casions Jackson  had  to  use  one  part  of  his  army  to 
prevent  another  part  from  marching  home,  he  and 
they  differing  on  the  construction  of  the  terms  of 
enlistment.  He  showed  very  strong  qualities  under 
these  trying  circumstances.  He  endured  delay  with 
impatience,  but  with  fortitude,  and  without  a  sug- 
gestion of  abandoning  the  enterprise,1  although  he 
was  in  wretched  health  all  the  time.  He  managed 
his  soldiers  with  energy  and  tact.  He  understood 
their  dispositions.  He  knew  how  to  be  severe  with 
them  without  bringing  them  to  open  revolt,  and 
he  knew  how  to  make  the  most  efficacious  appeals 
to  them. 

In  the  conduct  of  the  movements  against  the 
enemy  his  energy  was  very  remarkable.  So  long 
as  there  was  an  enemy  unsubdued  Jackson  could 
not  rest,  and  could  not  give  heed  to  anything  else. 
Obstacles  which  lay  in  the  way  between  him  and 
such  unsubdued  enemy  were  not  allowed  to  deter 
him.  This  restless  and  absorbing  determination 
to  reach  and  crush  anything  which  was  hostile  was 
one  of  the  most  marked  traits  in  Jackson's  charac- 

graphy,  124,  131,  and  description  of  a  muster  and  training  in  2 
Lambert's  Travels,  192.  The  western  soldiers  of  this  period  re- 
semble very  closely  the  colonial  troops  of  60  or  70  years  before. 

1  To  Governor  Blount,  who  proposed  that  he  should  retire  from 
the  expedition,  Jackson  wrote  a  strenuous  remonstrance,  even  an 
admonition.  Eaton's  Jackson,  101. 


40  ANDREW  JACKSON 

ter.  It  appeared  in  all  his  military  operations, 
and  he  carried  it  afterwards  into  his  civil  activity. 
He  succeeded  in  his  military  movements.  This 
gave  him  the  confidence  and  adherence  of  his  men. 
The  young  men  of  the  State  then  hastened  to  enlist 
with  him,  and  his  ranks  were  kept  well  filled,  be- 
cause one  who  had  fought  a  campaign  with  him, 
and  had  a  story  to  tell,  became  a  hero  in  the  settle- 
ment. Jackson's  military  career  and  his  popularity 
thus  rapidly  acquired  momentum  from  all  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  case  and  all  the  forces  at  work. 
He  was  then  able  to  enforce  discipline  and  obedi- 
ence, by  measures  which,  as  it  seems,  no  other 
frontier  commander  would  have  dared  to  use. 

On  the  14th  of  March,  1814,  he  ordered  John 
Wood  to  be  shot  for  insubordination  and  assault 
on  an  officer.  This  was  the  first  of  the  acts  of 
severity  committed  by  Jackson  as  a  commanding 
officer,  which  were  brought  up  against  him  in  the 
presidential  campaigns  when  he  was  a  candidate. 
Wood  was  technically  guilty.  He  acted  just  as 
any  man  in  the  frontier  army,  taught  to  reverence 
nobody  and  submit  to  no  authority,  would  have 
acted  under  the  circumstances.  If  it  had  not  been 
for  the  great  need  of  enforcing  discipline,  ex- 
tenuating circumstances  which  existed  would  have 
demanded  a  mitigation  of  the  sentence.  Party 
newspapers  during  a  presidential  campaign  are  not 
a  fair  court  of  appeal  to  review  the  acts  which  a 
military  commander  in  the  field  may  think  neces- 
sary in  order  to  maintain  discipline.  Jackson 


THE  CREEK  WAR  41 

showed  in  this  case  that  he  was  not  afraid  to  do 
his  duty,  and  that  he  would  not  sacrifice  the  public 
service  to  curry  popularity. 

At  the  end  of  March,  Jackson  destroyed  a  body 
of  the  Creeks  at  Tohopeka,  or  Horse-Shoe  Bend, 
in  the  northeast  corner  of  the  present  Tallapoosa 
County,  Alabama.  With  the  least  possible  delay 
he  pushed  on  to  the  last  refuge  of  the  Creeks, 
the  Hickory  Ground,  at  the  confluence  of  the 
Coosa  and  Tallapoosa,  and  the  Holy  Ground  a  few 
miles  distant.  The  medicine  men,  appealing  to  the 
superstition  of  the  Indians,  had  taught  them  to 
believe  that  no  white  man  could  tread  the  latter 
ground  and  live.  In  April  the  remnant  of  the 
Creeks  surrendered  or  fled  to  Florida,  overcome 
as  much  by  the  impetuous  and  relentless  charac- 
ter of  the  campaign  against  them  as  by  actual 
blows.  Fort  Jackson  was  built  on  the  Hickory 
Ground.  The  march  down  through  Alabama  was  a 
great  achievement,  considering  the  circumstances  of 
the  country  at  the  time.  Major-General  Thomas 
Pinckney,  of  the  regular  army,  came  to  Fort  Jack- 
son, April  20th,  and  took  command.  He  gave 
to  Jackson's  achievements  the  most  generous  re- 
cognition both  on  the  spot  and  in  his  reports. 
April  21,  1814,  the  West  Tennessee  militia  were 
dismissed,  and  they  marched  home. 

The  Creek  campaign  lasted  only  seven  months. 
In  itself  considered,  it  was  by  no  means  an  im- 
portant Indian  war,  but  in  its  connection  with 
other  military  movements  it  was  very  important. 


42  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Tecumseh  had  been  killed  at  the  battle  of  the 
Thames  in  Canada,  October  5,  1813.  His  scheme 
of  a  race  war  died  with  him.  The  Creek  cam- 
paign put  an  end  to  any  danger  of  hostilities  from 
the  southwestern  Indians,  in  alliance  either  with 
other  Indians  or  with  the  English.  It  was  hence- 
forth possible  to  plan  military  operations  and  pass 
through  the  Indian  territory  without  regard  to  the 
disposition  of  the  Indians.  This  state  of  things 
had  been  brought  about  very  summarily,  while 
military  events  elsewhere  had  been  discouraging. 

This  campaign,  therefore,  was  the  beginning  of 
Jackson's  fame  and  popularity,  arid  from  it  dates 
his  career.  He  was  forty-seven  years  old.  On 
the  31st  of  May  he  was  appointed  a  major-general 
in  the  army  of  the  United  States,  and  was  given 
command  of  the  department  of  the  South.  He 
established  his  headquarters  at  Mobile  in  August, 
1814.  That  town  had  been  occupied  by  Wilkin- 
son, April  13, 1813.  There  were  fears  of  an  attack 
either  on  Mobile  or  New  Orleans.  English  forces 
appeared,  and  took  post  at  Pensacola.  Jackson 
naturally  desired  to  attack  the  enemy  where  he 
found  him.  The  relations  of  the  parties  must  be 
borne  in  mind.1  Spain  was  a  neutral  and  owned 
Florida,  but  the  boundaries  of  Florida  were  in 
dispute  between  Spain  and  the  United  States. 
Jackson  would  not  have  been  a  southwestern  man 
if  he  had  not  felt  strongly  about  that  dispute.  We 
have  seen 2  that  one  of  Jackson's  first  thoughts, 
1  See  page  23.  e  See  page  35. 


CAPTURE  OF  PENSACOLA  43 

when  war  with  England  broke  out,  was  that  Florida 
might  be  conquered.  Now  Spain  appeared  to  be 
allowing  England  to  use  Florida  as  a  base  of  opera- 
tions. Jackson  wrote  to  Washington  for  leave  to 
attack  Pensacola.  It  did  not  suit  his  temper  to 
sit  still  under  a  great  anxiety  as  to  which  spot  on 
a  long  coast  might  be  chosen  by  the  enemy  as  the 
point  of  attack.  The  Secretary  of  War  (Arm- 
strong) replied  to  Jackson's  application  that  it  was 
necessary,  before  invading  Spanish  territory,  to 
know  certainly  whether  Spain  voluntarily  yielded 
the  use  of  her  territory  to  England.  This  letter 
did  not  reach  Jackson  until  the  war  was  over.  All 
Jackson's  letters  of  this  period  to  the  State  and 
federal  authorities  have  a  tone  of  lecturing  which 
gives  deep  insight  into  the  character  of  the  man. 
He  meant  no  disrespect,  but  the  case  seemed  so 
clear  to  him  that  he  set  it  forth  with  an  unconscious 
directness  of  language  which  violated  official  forms. 
Jackson  had  but  a  very  small  force  at  Mobile, 
very  inadequately  provided  with  any  of  the  neces- 
saries of  war.  The  government  at  Washington 
was  falling  to  pieces.  On  the  24th  of  August 
the  English  captured  Washington  and  burned  the 
public  buildings.  Jackson  could  not  obtain  either 
assistance  or  orders.  September  14th,  the  English 
attacked  Fort  Bowyer,  on  Mobile  Point,  and  were 
repulsed  with  energy  and  good  fortune.  They 
retired  to  Pensacola.  Jackson  advanced  against 
Pensacola  without  orders  from  Washington,  and 
reached  that  place  November  6th,  with  3000  men. 


*4  ANDREW  JACKSON 

He  easily  stormed  the  town.  The  Spaniards  sur- 
rendered the  forts  near  the  town.  The  English 
blew  up  the  fort  at  Barrancas  and  departed.1  Jack- 
son immediately  returned  to  Mobile,  fearing  a 
new  attack  there.  This  energetic  action  against 
Pensacola,  which  a  timid  commander  would  have 
hesitated  to  take,  although  the  propriety  of  it  could 
not  be  seriously  questioned,  was  the  second  great 
step  in  the  war  in  the  South.  If  the  Creeks  had 
not  been  subdued,  Mobile  could  not  have  been 
defended.  If  Pensacola  had  not  been  captured, 
New  Orleans  could  not  have  been  defended  three 
months  later.  Jackson  had  extraordinary  luck,  but 
he  deserved  it  by  his  energy  and  enterprise.  All 
the  accidents  fell  out  in  his  favor,  and  all  contri- 
buted to  his  final  success. 

On  the  2d  of  December,  1814,  Jackson  reached 
New  Orleans,  where  he  expected  the  next  blow  to 
fall.  Nothing  had  been  done  there  to  prepare  for 
defence,  and  no  supplies  were  there,  —  not  even 
arms.  Edward  Livingston  and  a  Frenchman  named 
Louaillier  were  alone  active  even  in  preparing 
the  minds  of  the  people  for  defence.  Jackson 
declared  martial  law  as  a  means  of  impressing  sol- 
diers and  sailors,  and  began  preparations  for  de- 
fending the  city,  in  spite  of  discouragements  and 
the  lack  of  all  proper  means.  He  seemed  to  be 
possessed  by  a  kind  of  frenzy  or  fanaticism  at  the 
idea  of  any  one  "  invading "  American  territory. 
As  SOOP  as  he  heard  of  the  landing  effected  by  the 

1  7  Niles,  271.     Latour,  44  et  seq. 


BATTLE   OF  NEW   ORLEANS  45 

English  after  they  had  destroyed  the  flotilla  on  the 
lakes,  he  set  out  to  meet  them  with  such  forces  as 
he  had.  He  arrested  their  advance  as  far  from  the 
city  as  possible,  pushed  on  his  preparations  with 
redoubled  energy  and  activity,  and  was  indefati- 
gable in  devising  and  combining  means  of  defence,, 
"The  energy  manifested  by  General  Jackson 
spread,  as  it  were,  by  contagion,  and  communicated 
itself  to  the  whole  army.  I  shall  add,  that  there 
was  nothing  which  those  who  composed  it  did  not 
feel  themselves  capable  of  performing,  if  he  ordered 
it  to  be  done.  It  was  enough  that  he  expressed  a 
wish,  or  threw  out  the  slightest  intimation,  and  im- 
mediately a  crowd  of  volunteers  offered  themselves 
to  carry  his  views  into  execution."  l  He  made  the 
utmost  of  all  the  means  he  possessed  and  devised 
substitutes  for  what  he  lacked.  He  enlisted  free 
colored  men  in  spite  of  the  great  dissatisfaction 
which  this  caused.2  Thus,  with  every  day  that 
passed,  his  position  became  stronger.  The  enemy 
were  veteran  troops,  amply  provided  with  all  the 
best  appliances  of  war,  but,  as  it  appears,  not  well 
commanded.  An  energetic  advance  on  their  part, 
at  the  first  moment,  would  have  won  the  city.  It 
was,  however,  Jackson  who  made  the  energetic  ad- 
vance at  the  first  moment,  and  he  never  let  them 
get  any  farther. 

Both  parties  courted  the  alliance  of  the  pirates 
of  Barataria.  When  the  English  made  the  first 
overtures,  Jackson  denounced  them  for  seeking 

1  Latour,  Preface,  p.  17.       .  .  a  Gayarre,  359,  409,  505. 


46  ANDREW  JACKSON 

alliance  with  "  pirates  and  hellish  banditti."  The 
pirates  thought  that  their  interest  lay  with  the 
Americans  and  joined  them.  Then  Jackson  called 
them  "  privateers  and  gentlemen."  In  the  Amer- 
ican histories  they  have  generally  been  lauded  as 
"  patriots."  l  Jackson's  proclamations  were  bom- 
bastic imitations  of  those  of  Napoleon.  It  is  not 
known  who  wrote  the  earlier  ones.  Some  of  his 
later  ones,  at  New  Orleans,  are  attributed  to  Liv- 
ingston. 

The  story  of  the  battle  which  took  place  is  a 
strange  one.  Everything  fell  out  favorably  for 
Jackson  as  if  by  magic.  The  English  lost  their 
way,  fired  into  each  other,  adopted  foolish  rumors, 
disobeyed  orders,  neglected  precautions.  The  two 
parties  built  redoubts  out  of  the  same  mud,  and 
cannonaded  each  other  all  day  through  a  dense 
smoke.  At  night  the  American  works  were  hardly 
damaged,  while  the  English  works  were  battered 
to  pieces  and  the  cannon  dismounted.  On  the  8th 
of  January,  1815,  the  English  made  their  grand 
assault  on  Jackson's  works.  Latour  says  that  they 
were  over-confident,  and  that  they  disregarded  the 
obstacles.  They  were  repulsed  with  great  slaughter. 
Their  loss  in  general  and  field  officers  was  espe- 
cially remarkable.  Only  on  the  west  bank  of  the 
river  did  the  English  gain  some  advantage.  Gen- 
eral Jackson  said  then  —  and  he  always  afterwards 
refused  to  withdraw  the  assertion,  in  spite  of  the 
remonstrances  of  General  Adair,  and  in  spite  of  a 
1  19  National  Magazine,  358 ;  Gayarre,  353. 


BATTLE  OF  NEW  ORLEANS  47 

long  controversy  —  that  the  Kentucky  troops  on 
the  west  side  "  ingloriously  fled."  1  This  is  worth 
noticing  only  because  it  shows  that  Jackson  would 
not  recede  from  what  he  thought  true,  either  to 
soothe  wounded  pride  or  to  win  popularity.  If  the 
English  had  had  a  little  larger  force  on  the  west  side, 
they  would  have  won  that  position,  and  would  have 
more  than  counterbalanced  all  Jackson's  success  on 
the  east  bank,  for  the  batteries  on  the  west  bank 
could  easily  have  been  made  to  command  Jackson's 
camp  and  works.  The  English  withdrew  after 
their  repulse.  Their  loss,  January  8th,  was  over 
2000  killed,  wounded,  and  missing  ;  Jackson's  was 
seven  killed  and  six  wounded.2  The  treaty  of 
peace  had  been  signed  at  Ghent  December  24, 
1814,  two  weeks  before  the  battle  took  place. 
Before  the  English  attempted  any  further  opera- 
tions in  Louisiana,  the  news  of  the  peace  was  re- 
ceived. They  captured  Fort  Bowyer  in  a  second 
attack,  February  12,  1815. 

A  brilliant  victory  was  the  last  thing  any  one  in 
the  United  States  had  expected  to  hear  of  from 
New  Orleans.  The  expectations  under  which  the 
war  had  been  undertaken  had  all  been  disap- 
pointed. Canada  had  not  been  conquered.  The 
United  States  had  ranged  itself  with  the  defeated, 

1  7  Niles,  373.     Latour,  App.  52.     Latour  makes  an  apology 
for  the  Kentuckians,  p.  174. 

2  Latour,  App.  55,  153.    See  accounts  of  the  battle  in  Cable's 
History  of  New  Orleans,  in  10th  Census,  Social  Statist.  II,  255 
fg. ;  Walker's  Jackson ;  Gleig's  Campaigns. 


48  ANDREW  JACKSON 

and  not  with  the  successful  party  in  Europe.  The 
war  had  been  more  than  nominal,  but  on  land  it 
had  been  anything  but  glorious.  Only  011  the  sea 
did  the  few  frigates  which  the  federalists  had  built, 
while  they  controlled  the  federal  government,  vin- 
dicate the  national  honor  by  brilliant  successes. 
Jefferson's  a  priori  navy  of  gunboats  had  disap- 
peared and  been  forgotten.  The  war  party  had 
looked  upon  Gallatin  as  their  financier.  He  had 
told  them  in  1809  that  war  could  be  carried  on 
without  taxes,  but  they  had  squandered,  against 
his  remonstrances,  resources  on  which  he  relied 
when  he  so  declared,  and  they  had  refused  to  re- 
charter  the  Bank  as  he  desired.  When  the  war 
broke  out  he  went  to  Russia  as  one  of  the  peace 
commissioners.  There  was  no  one  competent  to 
succeed  him,  and  the  democrats  never  forgave  him 
for  the  embarrassments  which  they  suffered  in  try- 
ing to  manage  the  finances.1  He  did  not  resign 
his  secretaryship,  but  was  superseded  February  9, 
1814.  Good  democrats  thought  that  sending  him 
abroad  was  a  repetition  of  the  course  they  had 
blamed  in  Jay's  case.2  It  certainly  was  a  very 
strange  policy  to  leave  the  treasury  without  a  regu- 
lar head  in  war-time.  The  banks  suspended,  the 
currency  fell  into  confusion,  heavy  taxation  became 
necessary,  and  the  public  finances  were  brought  to 
the  verge  of  bankruptcy.  The  party  which  had 
made  such  an  outcry  about  direct  taxes,  national 

1  See  Ingersoll,  74. 

2  Carey's  Olive  Branch,  63. 


NEW  ASPECT  OF  THE  WAR  49 

bank,  and  eight  per  cent  loans,  imitated  Hamil- 
ton's system  of  direct  taxes  and  excise  throughout. 
They  were  discussing  a  big  paper-money  bank  011 
the  day  (February  13th)  when  news  of  the  Treaty 
of  Ghent  reached  Washington,  and  they  would 
have  adopted  it  if  the  war  had  continued.  They 
sold  six  per  cent  bonds  for  eighty  and  eighty-five 
in  a  currency  of  bank  rags  depreciated  twenty  or 
twenty-five  per  cent.  A  grand  conscription  bill 
was  also  in  preparation,  and  the  Hartford  conven- 
tion had  just  adjourned,  having  done  much  or  little 
according  as  peace  or  war  might  make  it  expedient 
to  put  one  sense  or  another  on  ambiguous  phrases. 
When  Napoleon  fell,  and  England  was  left  free 
to  devote  her  attention  to  this  country  as  her  only 
remaining  foe,  the  war  took  on  a  new  aspect.  June 
13,  1814,  Gallatin  wrote  home  that  a  large  force 
was  fitting  out  in  England  against  America.  Ad- 
miral Cochrane  wrote  to  Monroe  that  he  had  orders 
to  devastate  the  coasts  of  the  United  States.  The 
first  conditions  of  peace  talked  of  by  England  in- 
volved cession  of  territory  in  Michigan  and  the 
Ohio  territory,  as  well  as  concessions  of  trading 
privileges  and  navigation  of  the  Mississippi,  — 
terms  which  could  not  be  accepted  until  after  a 
great  deal  more  hard  fighting.  The  feeling  here 
in  the  autumn  of  1814  was  one  of  deep  despond- 
ency and  gloom.1  The  victory  of  New  Orleans  was 

1  See  Niles's  Begister,  vol.  7  ;  Pres.  Message,  1814  ;  1  Goodrich, 
Letter  xxx. ;  Carey's  Olive  Branch,  preface  4th  and  6th  ed.  In- 
tjersoll  finds  room  for  the  opinion  that  the  prospects  for  1815  were 
bright. 


50  ANDREW  JACKSON 

the  cause  of  boundless  delight,  especially  because 
the  news  of  it  reached  the  North  at  just  about  the 
same  time  as  the  news  of  peace,  and  there  was  no 
anxiety  about  the  future  to  mar  the  exultation. 
The  victory  was  a  great  consolation  to  the  national 
pride,  which  had  been  sorely  wounded  by  military 
failures,  and  by  the  capture  of  Washington.  The 
power  of  Great  Britain  had  been  met  and  repulsed 
when  put  forth  at  its  best,  and  when  the  American 
resources  were  scanty  and  poor.  To  the  adminis- 
tration and  the  war  party  the  victory  was  political 
salvation.  The  public  plainly  saw,  however,  that 
the  federal  administration  had  done  nothing  for 
the  victory.  Jackson  had  been  the  soul  of  the  de- 
fence from  the  beginning,  and  to  his  energy  and 
perseverance  success  was  due.  He  therefore  got 
all  the  credit  of  it,  and  the  administration  was  only 
too  glad  to  join  in  the  plaudits,  since  attention  was 
thereby  diverted  from  its  blunders  and  failure. 
These  facts  explain  Jackson's  popularity.  In  the 
space  of  time  between  September,  1813,  and  Janu- 
ary, 1815,  he  had  passed  from  the  status  of  an  ob- 
scure Tennessee  planter  to  that  of  the  most  dis- 
tinguished and  popular  man  in  the  country. 

In  the  treaty  of  peace  nothing  was  said  about 
impressment,  the  "  principle  "  of  which  was  what 
the  United  States  had  been  striving  about  ever 
since  1806,  and  which  was  the  only  cause  of  the 
war.  The  war  was  therefore  entirely  fruitless  as  to 
the  causes  which  were  alleged  for  it  at  the  outset. 
What  the  course  of  things  might  have  been,  if 


RESULTS  OF  THE  WAR  51 

a  wiser  statesmanship  had  adopted  Monroe  and 
Pinkney's  treaty,  and  pursued  a  steady  course  of 
peace  and  industrial  growth,  so  far  as  the  state  of 
the  world  would  allow,  is  a  matter  of  speculation  ; 
but,  in  the  course  which  things  did  take,  there  are. 
especial  and  valuable  features  of  our  history  which 
are  to  be  traced  to  the  second  war  with  England 
as  their  origin.  The  discontent  of  New  England 
faded  away  at  once,  and  there  was  a  stronger  feel- 
ing of  nationality  and  confidence  throughout  the 
country  than  there  ever  had  been  before.1  From 
that  time  on  the  Union  had  less  of  the  character 
of  a  temporary  experiment.  The  country  had  also 
won  respect  abroad,  and  was  recognized  in  the 
family  of  nations  as  it  had  not  been  before.  From 
1789  to  1815  the  European  nations  were  absorbed 
by  European  politics  and  war.  At  the  end  of  this 
period  they  turned  to  find  that  a  new  nation  had 
begun  to  grow  up  on  the  western  continent.  The 
Americans  had  shown  that  they  could  build  ships 
of  war,  and  sail  them,  and  fight  them  on  an  equal 
footing.  To  the  military  states  of  Europe  this  was 
a  fact  which  inspired  respect. 

To  return  to  our  more  immediate  subject :  There 
had  been  another  dispute  about  terms  of  enlist- 
ment at  Fort  Jackson  in  September,  1814.  About 
200  men,  some  of  whom  broke  open  a  store-house 
to  get  supplies,  and  indulged  in  expressions  and 
acts  of  contempt  for  authority,  marched  home  with- 
out the  consent  of  their  commanding  officer.  Most 

1  Gallatin  expressed  this  opinion.     1  Gallatin's  Writings,  700. 


52  ANDREW  JACKSON 

of  them  came  back ;  some  being  compelled,  others 
thinking  better  of  it,  and  others  after  assuaging 
their  homesickness.  A  large  number  were  put 
under  arrest  and  tried  by  court-martial.  Six  were 
.condemned  to  death,  and,  by  Jackson's  orders, 
were  executed  at  Mobile,  February  21,  [?]  181 5.1 
The  question  of  law  involved  was  a  difficult  one. 
The  men  took  the  risk  of  acting  on  their  own  view 
of  that  question,  while  they  were  under  military 
law.  The  tribunal  was  competent,  the  law  undis- 
puted, and  the  proceedings  regular,  but  attempts 
were  made  to  make  political  capital  out  of  the  in- 
cident, when  Jackson  became  a  candidate.  There 
had  never  been  such  discipline  in  an  American 
army,2  least  of  all  in  the  West.  Jackson,  and  Lewis 
on  his  behalf,  did  not  avow  and  defend,  although 
some  of  his  adherents  did  do  so,  on  the  ground  of 
need  of  discipline.  Lewis  denied  that  Jackson  or- 
dered the  execution.  He  wrote,  at  different  times, 
versions  of  the  story  which  are  not  strictly  accord- 
ant. In  1827  Jackson  wrote  to  Lewis  that  the 
men  were  sentenced  to  be  shaved  and  drummed  out 
of  camp,  but  that  even  this  sentence  was  not  to 
be  executed.  "  There  was  no  punishment  on  any 
one  of  them  inflicted,  or  my  orders  were  violated/"  8 
The  formal  finding  of  the  court  with  his  approval 

1  From  the  documents  as  given  in  34  Niles,  55  (1828).    Report 
of  a  Committee  of  the  House  friendly  to  Jackson. 

2  Jackson's  apologists  made  much  of  an  alleged  parallel  case 
under  Washington. 

8  Ford  MSS. 


MARTIAL  LAW  53 

and  order  for  execution  is  in  34  Niles,  73.  The 
noticeable  thing  is  that,  in  this  case,  quite  excep- 
tionally, he  tried  to  deny  and  evade  responsibility 
for  something  which  he  had  done. 

After  the  English  departed  from  New  Orleans 
Jackson  relaxed  none  of  his  vigilance,  but  con- 
tinued to  strengthen  his  force  by  all  the  means  at 
his  command.  In  this  he  acted  like  a  good  and 
wise  commander,  who  did  not  mean  to  be  caught. 
He  could  not  assume  that  the  enemy  would  not 
make  another  attack,  and  he  knew  nothing  yet  of 
the  peace.  He  maintained  the  attitude  of  alert 
preparation  until  he  was  sure  that  the  war  was  at 
an  end.  He  maintained  martial  law  in  the  city, 
and  he  administered  it  with  rigor.  Evidently  he 
thought  that  a  proclamation  of  martial  law  set 
aside  the  habeas  corpus  and  all  civil  law.1  The 
possession  of  absolute  and  arbitrary  power  did  not 
have  a  good  effect  on  him.  The  exhilaration  and 
self-confidence  of  success  and  flattery  affected  his 
acts.  It  appears  that  he  did  not  respect  all  the 
inhabitants  of  the  city ;  for  which  he  had  ample 
reason.2  They  were  a  motley  crowd,  and  he  thought 
that  some  of  them  were  not  ready  to  do  what  he 
thought  they  ought  to  do  to  defend  the  city.3  Any 
one  who  would  not  go  to  the  last  extreme  for  that 
object  could  count  on  Jackson's  contempt.  He 
meant  to  hold  the  city  in  such  shape  that  he  could 

1  Gayarre,  608;  Martin,  402. 

2  See  Cable's  History  of  New  Orleans. 

8  See  his  defence  in  reply  to  Hall's  writ,  8  Niles,  246. 


54  ANDREW  JACKSON 

make  every  man  in  it  contribute  to  its  defence,  if 
the  occasion  should  arise.  Frenchmen  had  certain 
privileges  for  twelve  years,  under  the  treaty  of 
1803.  They  had  generally  cooperated  in  the  de- 
fence, but,  after  the  English  departed,  they  sought 
certificates  of  nationality  in  order  to  secure  the 
privileges  and  exemptions  to  which  they  were  en- 
titled. To  Jackson  this  seemed  like  shirking  a 
share  of  the  common  burdens.  Livingston,  who 
had  been  on  an  embassy  to  the  English  fleet, 
brought  back  news,  on  the  18th  of  February,1  of 
the  peace.  Jackson  would  not  alter  his  attitude  or 
proceedings  on  account  of  this  intelligence,  because 
it  came  through  the  enemy,  although  it  was  trans- 
mitted in  a  formal  and  polite  note  from  the  Eng- 
lish naval  commander,  and  the  English  officers 
acted  on  it.  Jackson,  in  an  address  to  his  army, 
said  that  it  was  only  a  newspaper  report.  It  was 
a  "bulletin"  from  Jamaica,  dated  February  13.2 
February  24,  Governor  Claiborne  wanted  martial 
law  abolished.  On  February  28th,  Jackson  ordered 
all  who  had  certificates  of  French  nationality  to  go 
to  Baton  Rouge  before  March  3d,  on  the  ground 

1  Latour  says  on  the  10th.  This  date  has  been  regarded  as 
important  for  the  question  whether  Jackson  knew,  before  he  al- 
lowed the  six  militiamen  to  be  executed,  that  peace  had  been 
made.  The  order  for  execution  was  signed  at  New  Orleans,  Jan- 
uary 22,  and  it  was  to  be  executed  four  days  after  its  promulga- 
tion at  Mobile.  In  Dallas's  letter  to  Jackson  of  April  12,  mention 
is  made  of  a  letter  of  Jackson  of  February  6,  which  showed  that 
he  had  received  that  intelligence  then. 

«  Gayarre",  579,  623. 


MARTIAL  LAW  55 

that  he  would  have  no  man  in  the  city  who  was  not 
bound  to  help  defend  it.  March  8th  he  suspended 
this  order,  except  as  to  the  French  consul,  a  man 
who  had  lost  an  arm  in  the  American  revolution. 
There  had  been  almost  civil  war  between  the 
French  and  American  residents.  March  3d  the 
same  Louaillier,  who  had  been  conspicuous  as  an 
advocate  of  energetic  defence,  wrote  an  article  for 
a  local  paper,  criticising  the  order  of  February 
28th,  and  urging  that  martial  law  should  be  abol- 
ished. The  English  troops  had  all  departed  about 
six  weeks  before.1  The  editor,  when  called  to  ac- 
count for  this  article,  gave  up  his  contributor. 
Louaillier  was  arrested  March  4th,  under  a  law 
against  "  lurking  "  near  camps  and  forts.  Judge 
Hall,  of  the  United  States  District  Court,  issued  a 
writ  of  habeas  corpus  for  him.  Jackson  received 
news  of  the  peace  from  Washington  on  March  6th, 
but  by  some  blunder  the  courier  did  not  bring  the 
document  containing  the  official  notification.  On 
that  day  Jackson  convened  a  court-martial  to  try 
Louaillier.  He  sent  an  officer  to  arrest  Judge 
Hall,  and  to  obtain  from  the  clerk  of  the  court  the 
original  writ  of  habeas  corpus.  The  writ  was  writ- 
ten on  the  back  of  the  petition  for  it,2  on  the  5th, 
which  was  Sunday ;  therefore  it  was  dated  on  the 
6th.  Jackson  seized  the  original  writ  in  order  to 

1  Gayarre,  616. 

2  Martin,  397.     It  appears  that  the  writ  was  submitted  to  the 
judge  with  the  date,  the  5th,  and  that  he  changed  the  date  in 
signing  it. 


56  ANDREW  JACKSON 

prove  the  "  forgery  "  of  the  date.  In  1842  he  laid 
great  stress  on  this  alteration  of  the  date.  He 
seemed  to  think  that  it  bore  materially  on  the 
question  whether  Hall  was  guilty,  by  the  writ,  of 
inciting  to  mutiny  in  his  camp,1  but  although  he 
had,  what  was  called  in  the  documents  of  the  time, 
"persuasive  evidence"  of  peace  on  the  6th,  he 
maintained  his  military  organization  two  days 
longer.  On  the  8th  he  disbanded  the  militia.  On 
the  same  day  Dick,  the  District  Attorney  of  the 
United  States,  obtained  from  a  State  judge  a  ha- 
beas corpus  for  Hall.  Jackson  arrested  and  im- 
prisoned Dick  with  Louaillier.  He  arrested  the 
State  judge  too,  but  soon  released  him  and  Dick. 
The  court-martial  struck  out  all  the  charges  against 
Louaillier  except  one  (illegal  and  improper  con- 
duct), for  want  of  jurisdiction,  and  acquitted  him 
on  that.  Jackson  disapproved  of  this  finding,  and 
defended  his  own  proceedings.  On  the  llth  of 
March  he  sent  Hall  four  miles  out  of  the  city  and 
released  him.  Louaillier  was  kept  in  piison  until 
the  official  document  announcing  the  peace  was  re- 
ceived, March  13th.  On  the  22d  of  March  the 
United  States  District  Court  ordered  Jackson  to 
show  cause  why  an  attachment  should  not  issue 
against  him  for  contempt  of  court,  in  wresting  an 
original  document  from  the  court,  disobeying  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus,  and  imprisoning  the  judge. 
Jackson  refused  to  answer  save  by  a  general  vindi- 
cation of  his  proceedings.  This  the  judge  refused 
i  Several  letters  in  the  Ford  MSS.  and  62  Niles,  326; 


JACKSON'S  FINE  57 

to  hear,  and  fined  him  $  1000.1  Jackson  tried  to 
escape  by  saying  that  his  actions  were  against  Hall, 
the  man,  not  against  Hall,  the  judge.  In  1842 
Tyler  recommended  Congress  to  refund  the  fine 
without  reflecting  on  the  court.  J.  Q.  Adams  said 
in  a  speech,  January  6, 1843,  that  this  was  auction- 
eering for  the  presidency,  all  the  factions  desiring 
Jackson's  support.2  In  1844  Congress  refunded 
the  fine  with  interest,  —  total  82700.  In  a  letter 
to  L.  F.  Linn,  March  14,  1842,3  Jackson  refers  to 
the  fine  as  having  been  laid  because  he  declared 
martial  law.  He  wrote  to  Lewis,  in  1843  :  — 

"  It  surely  was  one  of  the  greatest  usurpations  in  Hall 
recorded  in  the  history  of  the  world  —  he  usurped  the 
power  of  the  holy  inquisition  to  charge,  try,  and  condemn 
me,  unheard  in  open  violation  of  the  constitution  &  all 
law  —  he  had  no  legal  power  for  his  proceedings  &  In- 
gersol  has  clearly  shewn  it,  and  I  trust  it  will  be  fully 
investigated^  now  whilst  I  am  living,  that  the  people 
may  see,  who  were  the  tyrants  &  who  the  usurper  of 
power."  4 

In  this  incident  Jackson  displayed  some  of  the 
faults  of  which  he  afterwards  showed  many  in- 

1  Report  of  a  committee  of  the  House  of  Representatives ;  64 
Niles,   61   (1843).     Cf.  the  account  in  8  Niles,  246,  and  Judge 
Hall's  response,  Ibid.,  272  (1815). 

2  63  Niles,  312. 

3  62  Niles,  212.     For  Jackson's  own  story  of  the  fine,  see  62 
Niles,  326. 

*  Ford  MSS.  The  best  account  of  the  trial,  etc.,  is  by  Judge 
Martin,  who  was  in  New  Orleans  at  the  time,  and  was  a  competent 
observer  and  historian.  His  account  has  been  followed  above. 


58  ANDREW  JACKSON 

stances.  He  spoiled  his  military  success  by  this 
unnecessary  collision  with  the  civil  authority.  He 
proved  himself  wrong-headed  and  persistent  in  a 
course  in  which  every  step  would  have  warned  him 
of  his  error,  if  he  had  been  willing  to  learn.  Being 
committed  by  his  first  passionate  and  hasty  step, 
he  was  determined  to  push  through  on  the  course 
he  had  adopted.  He  knew  with  reasonable  cer- 
tainty from  February  18,  and  to  a  moral  certainty 
from  the  6th  of  March,  that  the  war  was  at  an  end. 
All  these  mischievous  proceedings  took  place  on 
and  after  the  latter  date.  A  very  little  concession 
and  good-will  at  any  time  would  have  avoided  the 
whole  trouble,  but  Jackson  acted  as  if  he  was  de- 
termined to  grind  out  of  the  opposing  elements  in 
the  situation  all  the  friction  of  which  they  were 
capable. 

April  12th,  Dallas,  acting  Secretary  of  "War, 
wrote  a  dispatch  to  Jackson,  asking  for  explanations 
of  the  proceedings,  which  were  rehearsed  in  detail, 
and  very  accurately,  according  to  reports  v/hich  had 
reached  Washington.  "  The  President  views  the 
subject  in  its  present  aspect,  with  surprise  and  so- 
licitude ;  but  in  the  absence  of  all  information 
from  yourself,  relative  to  your  conduct  and  the 
motives  for  your  conduct,  he  abstains  from  any  de- 
cision, or  even  the  expression  of  an  opinion,  upon 
the  case,  in  hopes  that  such  explanations  may  be 
afforded  as  will  reconcile  his  sense  of  public  duty 
with  a  continuance  of  the  confidence  which  he  re- 
poses in  your  judgment,  discretion,  and  patriotism." 


JACKSON'S  FINE  59 

As  the  matter  was  all  past  and  dead,  and  no  one 
desired  to  mar  the  exultation  of  the  public  or  the 
personal  satisfaction  of  Jackson,  it  was  allowed  to 
drop. 

In  the  autumn  of  1815  Jackson  was  in  Washing- 
ton, conferring  with  the  War  Department  about 
the  peace  footing  of  the  army.  In  the  spring  of 
1816  he  was  at  New  Orleans  on  business  of  his 
military  department. 


CHAPTER  IH 

JACKSON  IN  FLORIDA 

ANDREW  JACKSON  took  no  important  part  in 
the  election  of  1816.  He  had  favored  Monroe  in 
1808,  and  he  preferred  him  to  the  other  candidates 
in  1816.  Crawford  was,  at  this  time,  Jackson's 
pet  dislike.  The  reason  for  this  was  that  Craw- 
ford, as  Secretary  of  War,  had  modified  Jackson's 
treaty  with  the  Creeks,  about  which  the  Cherokees, 
deeming  the  terms  unjust  to  them,  had  appealed 
to  the  President.  Jackson  made  a  personal  quar- 
rel with  a  public  man  for  not  acting  as  he,  Jackson, 
wanted  him  to  act  in  the  discharge  of  his  duty. 
Jackson  resumed  the  negotiation,  and  bought  again 
the  lands  ceded  before.  As  the  people  of  Tennes- 
see, Georgia,  and  Alabama  were  interested  in  the 
cession,  Jackson,  by  re-obtaining  it  after  it  had 
been  surrendered,  greatly  increased  his  popularity.1 

November  12,  1816,  a  letter,  signed  by  Jackson, 
was  addressed  to  Monroe,  immediately  after  hi? 
election  to  the  presidency,  urging  the  appointment 
of  Wm.  Dray  ton,  of  South  Carolina,  as  Secretary 
of  War.  Wm.  B.  Lewis,  Jackson's  neighbor  and 
confidential  friend,  husband  of  one  of  Mrs.  Jack- 
1  11  Niles,  143. 


JACKSON'S  LETTERS  61 

son's  nieces,  wrote  this  letter.  As  Parton  says, 
one  has  no  trouble  in  distinguishing  those  letters 
signed  Jackson,  but  which  have  been  copied  and 
revised  by  Lewis,  Lee,  Livingston  and  others,  from 
those  which  have  not  been  through  that  process.  A 
part  of  this  letter  was  connected  with  a  land  specu- 
lation, but  the  political  part  of  it  seems  gratuitous 
and  impertinent.  It  is,  in  fact,  introduced  by  an 
apology.  It  is  difficult  to  see  its  significance  and 
that  of  others  which  Jackson  wrote  during  this 
winter  (1816-17),  unless  he  was  being  used  to 
advance  an  intrigue  on  behalf  of  Drayton  about 
which  we  have  no  other  information.  The  ideas 
and  suggestions  are  not  at  all  such  as  would  arise 
in  Jackson's  mind.  Drayton  had  been  a  federalist. 
He  belonged  to  the  South  Carolina  aristocracy. 
No  ties  of  any  kind  are  known  to  have  existed 
between  him  and  Jackson,  either  before  or  after 
this  time.  Jackson  said  in  1824  that  he  did  not 
know  Drayton  in  1816.1  Drayton  was  not  ap- 
pointed. 

These  well-composed  letters  failed  entirely  of  their 
immediate  object;  and  they  reposed  in  obscurity 
for  seven  years.  Lewis  was  an  astonishingly  far- 
sighted  man.  We  shall  see  abundant  proofs,  here- 
after, of  his  power  to  put  down  a  stake  where  he 
foresaw  that  he  would  need  to  exert  a  strain  a  little 
later,  but  it  does  not  seem  credible  that  he  can 
have  foreseen  and  prepared  for  the  ultimate  pur- 
pose which  these  letters  served.  His  own  account^ 
1  26  Niles,  162. 


62  ANDREW  JACKSON 

endorsed  on  a  MS.  copy  of  this  especial  letter,  and 
dated  1835,  is:  — 

"  Gen.  Jackson  furnished  the  rough  draft,  from  which 
the  letter  was  prepared  by  the  undersigned.  The  ori- 
ginal letter  will  be  found,  if  examined,  to  be  in  my 
hand-writing.  The  ideas  are  the  General's  and  the 
language  mine.  It  contained  sentiments  so  patriotic  and 
liberal  I  thought  them  worthy  the  Hero  of  New  Orleans, 
and  deserved  to  be  handed  down  to  posterity.  So 
strongly  was  this  opinion  impressed  upon  my  mind,  at 
the  time,  that  I  took  a  copy,  unknown  to  him,  to  be 
placed  in  the  hands  of  his  future  biographer,  should  the 
original  fail  to  find  its  way  to  the  public.  This  precau- 
tion, however,  turned  out  to  be  unnecessary,  as  it  was 
unexpectedly  brought  to  light,  about  eleven  years  ago, 
and  has  been  frequently  published  since.  It  was  called 
out  by  Gen.  Jackson's  political  enemies,  when  he  way 
first  a  candidate  for  the  presidency.  They,  understand- 
ing such  a  letter  had  been  written  to  Mr.  Monroe, 
resolved  on  having  it  published,  under  the  belief  it  would 
ruin  him  in  the  estimation  of  the  republican  party  in 
Pennsylvania,  with  whom  he  was  a  great  favorite,  but 
in  this  they  reckoned  without  their  host.  Instead  of 
weakening,  it  evidently  strengthened  him,  and  was  one 
of  the  principal  causes  of  his  receiving  the  highest  elec- 
toral vote  in  1824,  and  was  probably  the  means  of 
securing  his  election  in  1828." 1 

He  engineered  the  "  calling  out "  and  the  produc- 
tion of  the  letter,  in  1824,  himself. 

In  the  course  of  his  argument  on  behalf  of  Dray- 
ton,  Jackson  was  led   (in  the  letters)  to  discuss 
i  Ford  MSS. 


INFLUENCE  OF  JACKSON'S  LETTERS       63 

the  general  theory  of  appointments,  and  to  urge 
Monroe  to  abandon  the  proscription  of  the  federal- 
ists, to  appoint  them  to  office,  and  to  promote 
reconciliation  and  good-will.  He  declared  that  he 
would  have  hung  the  leaders  of  the  Hartford  con- 
vention, if  he  had  been  in  command  in  the  eastern 
department  in  1815.  In  1823  and  1824  the  letters 
were  used  with  great  effect  to  draw  federalists  to 
the  support  of  Jackson.  They  were  delighted  with 
the  tone  and  sentiment  of  them,1  although  a  few 
winced  at  the  reference  to  the  Hartford  convention. 
In  1828  the  other  aspect  of  the  letters  rather  pre- 
dominated. The  democrats  were  not  quite  pleased 
that  Jackson  should  have  urged  Monroe  to  appoint 
federalists  and  disregard  party.2 

Monroe  was  being  acted  upon,  when  Jackson 
wrote  to  him,  from  the  other  side,  by  those  who 
wanted  him  to  favor  the  Monroe  faction  in  the  re- 
publican party.  He  had  enough  to  do  to  maintain 
himself  between  the  two  demands.  He  answered 
Jackson,  admitting  the  high  principle  of  the  course 
Jackson  advocated,  but  setting  forth  a  theory  of 
appointments  more  conformable  to  the  exigencies 
of  party  politics. 

April  22, 1817,  Jackson  published  an  order  to  his 
department  forbidding  his  subordinates  to  obey  any 
order  from  the  War  Department  not  issued  through 

1  Binns,  249. 

2  The  whole   correspondence,  26  Niles,  163  et  seq.     See  com- 
ments quoted,  ibid.,  p.  219.     For  the  disapproval  of  the  demo- 
crats, see  Binns,  246. 


B4  ANDREW  JACKSON 

him.  He  had  been  much  and  justly  annoyed  at 
incidents  in  the  service  under  him,  of  which  he  had 
not  been  informed  beforehand,  and  also  by  direct 
orders  issued  from  Washington,  which  interfered 
with  his  arrangements  and  frustrated  them  without 
his  knowledge.  On  the  merits  of  the  question  he 
was  in  the  right,  but  his  public  "  order  "  produced 
an  unnecessary  scandal  and  public  collision  in  a 
case  where  a  proper  private  representation  to  the 
department  would  have  answered  every  purpose. 
Crawford  was  transferred  to  the  treasury  in  Octo- 
ber, 1816.  There  was  difficulty  in  filling  the  posi- 
tion of  Secretary  of  War.  Calhoun  was  appointed 
October  8,  1817.  He  conceded  the  point  claimed 
by  Jackson,  reserving  only  the  cases  of  emer- 
gency. 

Some  persons  informed  Jackson  that  General 
Scott  had  animadverted  upon  his  action  in  the 
matter  just  mentioned,  and  had  characterized  it  as 
mutiny.  September  8, 1817,  Jackson  wrote  a  fiery 
letter  to  Scott,  calling  him  to  account.  Scott  re- 
plied that,  in  private  conversation,  he  had  said  that 
the  order  of  April  22d  was  mutinous  as  to  the  fu- 
ture, and  a  reflection  on  the  President,  the  Com- 
mander-in-Chief,  as  to  the  past.  He  disclaimed 
any  personal  feeling.  Jackson  replied  in  a  very 
insulting  letter,  in  which  the  well-battered  question, 
Who  of  us  two  is  the  gentleman  ?  did  good  service 
again,  and  he  wound  up  with  a  challenge  to  a  duel. 
Scott  declined  the  challenge  on  the  ground  of  re- 
ligious scruples  and  patriotic  duty.  The  cor  re- 


INSUBORDINATION  65 

spondence  was  almost  immediately  published.  It 
created  another  scandal,  for  the  public  was  not  edi- 
fied to  see  two  of  the  first  officers  of  the  army  en- 
gaged in  such  a  quarrel.1  Niles,  who  at  this  time 
greatly  admired  Jackson,  and  who  is  always  a  good 
representative  of  the  average  citizens  of  his  time, 
refrained  from  publishing  the  correspondence  until 
April,  1819.2  In  this  case,  again,  Jackson  showed 
evidence  of  an  ungovernable  temper  and  a  willing- 
ness to  profit  by  every  opportunity  for  a  quarrel. 

There  was,  however,  more  public  fighting  at 
hand. 

There  were  in  Florida  many  refugee  Indians  of 
the  Creek  nation,  who  were  hostile  to  the  United 
States,  and  many  runaway  negroes.  During  the 
war  the  English  had  sought  such  aid  as  they  could 
get  from  these  persons  in  their  operations  against 
the  United  States.  They  had  built  a  fort  on  the 
Appalachicola  River,  about  fifteen  miles  from  its 
mouth,  and  had  collected  there  an  immense  amount 
of  arms  and  ammunition.  The  English  officers 
who  were  operating  in  Florida  acted  with  a  great 
deal  of  arbitrary  self-will.  They  were  not  under 
strict  responsibility  to  their  own  government. 
They  were  operating  on  Spanish  territory.  They 
were  stirring  up  Indians  and  negroes,  and  were  not 
commanding  a  regular  or  civilized  force.  It  is  diffi- 
cult to  understand  some  of  their  proceedings  in  any 
point  of  view,  and  other  of  their  doings  certainly 
would  not  have  been  sanctioned  by  the  English 

1  14  Niles,  295  ;  4  Adams,  323.  2  16  Niles,  121. 


66  ANDREW  JACKSON 

government,  if  known  to  it.    The  officers  were  able 
to  gratify  their  own  malice  without  responsibility. 

When  the  war  ended,  the  English  left  the  arms 
and  ammunition  in  the  fort.  The  negroes  seized 
the  fort,  and  it  became  known  as  the  "  Negro  Fort." 
The  authorities  of  the  United  States  sent  General 
Gaines  to  the  Florida  frontier  with  troops,  to 
establish  peace  on  the  border.  The  Negro  Fort 
was  a  source  of  anxiety  both  to  the  military  au- 
thorities and  to  the  slave-owners  of  Georgia,  and, 
according  to  some  accounts,  the  first  step  was  its 
investment.  It  is  otherwise  stated  that  the  Ameri- 
can authorities  undertook  to  bring  supplies  up  the 
Appalachicola  for  a  fort  which  they  were  building 
in  Georgia,  and  that  the  boats  were  fired  on,  after 
which  the  troops  marched  down  from  Georgia  and 
invested  the  fort,  having  received  permission  to  do 
so  from  the  Spanish  authorities  at  Pensacola,  who 
also  very  unwillingly  saw  a  great  fortress  estab- 
lished in  their  territory,  and  held  by  negroes  and 
Indians.1  The  fort  was  bombarded.  A  hot  shot 
penetrated  one  of  the  magazines,  and  the  whole 
fort  was  blown  to  pieces,  July  27,  1816.  There 
were  three  hundred  negro  men,  women,  and  chil- 
dren and  twenty  Choctaws  in  the  fort ;  two  hun- 
dred and  seventy  were  killed.  Only  three  came 
out  unhurt,  and  these  were  killed  by  the  allied  In- 
dians.2 

1  Document  A,  55. 

2  See  Wait's  State  Papers,  vii.  478, 482  ;  viii.  126-135 ;  ix.  41- 
i9;  154-198. 


THE  NEGRO  FORT  67 

Spain  was  engaged  in  hostilities  with  her  re- 
volted colonies  in  America.  Filibusters  and  pri- 
vateers took  advantage  of  this  state  of  things  to 
carry  on  a  certain  grade  of  piracy  and  the  slave- 
trade.  Amelia  Island,  on  the  northeast  coast  of 
Florida,  had  been  infested  by  smugglers,  slavers, 
and  freebooters  ever  since  the  war  with  England. 
In  1817  the  island  was  occupied  by  a  filibuster 
named  McGregor,  and  later  by  another  named 
Aury.  They  pretended  to  desire  to  render  Florida 
independent,  and  there  was  a  measure  of  honest 
intention  in  their  plans,  but  the  island  was  a  nest 
of  outlaws  and  a  nuisance.  The  troops  of  the 
United  States  took  possession  of  the  island  and 
drove  the  freebooters  out,  because  Spain  was  not 
able  to  do  so.  Old  causes  of  complaint  against 
Spain  with  respect  to  Florida  have  been  described 
above.1  The  hostile  Indians  and  the  freebooters 
were  new  causes  of  annoyance.  The  Georgians 
were  also  annoyed  that  their  slaves  found  an  easy 
refuge  in  Florida.  It  had  been  amply  proved  that 
Spain  could  not  fulfil  the  duties  which  devolved 
upon  her  as  owner  of  Florida.  Yet  she  strenuously 
insisted  that  her  sovereignty  should  be  respected.2 
For  all  these  reasons  the  United  States  was  very 
anxious  to  buy  Florida. 

During  1817  there  were  frequent  collisions  on 
the  frontiers  between  white  men  and  Indians.  Ex- 
Governor  Mitchell  of  Georgia,  the  Indian  agent, 
the  fairest  and  best  informed  witness  who  appeared 
1  See  page  23.  2  Document  A,  55. 


68  ANDREW  JACKSON 

before  the  committee  of  Congress  in  1818-19,  de- 
posed that  the  blame  for  these  collisions  was  equal, 
that  one  party  was  as  often  the  aggressor  as  the 
other,  and  that  the  lawless  persons  in  Florida  were 
especially  to  blame  for  acts  of  injury  which  pro- 
voked retaliation.1  When  Gaines  wrote  to  the  chief 
Kenhigee  that  his  Indians  had  killed  white  men, 
the  chief  replied  that  four  Indians  had  been  killed 
for  every  white  man.2  The  reports  which  were 
sent  North  were,  as  usual  in  such  cases,  only  such 
as  tended  to  show  an  aggressive  disposition  on  the 
part  of  the  Indians.3 

On  the  20th  of  November,  General  Gaines  sent 
a  force  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  men  to  Fowltown, 
the  headquarters  of  the  chief  of  the  "  Redsticks," 
or  hostile  Creeks.  They  approached  the  town  in 
the  early  morning,  and  were  fired  on.  An  en- 
gagement followed.  The  town  was  taken  and 
burned.  Gaines's  dispatch  to  the  Governor  of 
Georgia  puts  the  number  of  Indians  killed  at 
four.4  Ex-Governor  Mitchell  of  Georgia,  quoted 
above,  said,  "  This  fact  was,  I  conceive,  the  cause 
of  the  Seminole  war."  It  is,  however,  fair  to  say 
that  Mitchell  was  unfriendly  to  Gaines  and  to 
Jackson.5  The  Indians  of  that  section,  after  this, 
began  general  hostilities,  attacked  the  boats  which 
were  ascending  the  Appalachicola,  and  massacred 
the  persons  in  them.  Gaines  states  no  reason  at 

1  16  Niles,  85.  2  Document  A,  140. 

8  See  the  items  of  news  from  Florida  in  13  Niles. 
*  13  Nileg,  296.  &  43  ^iles,  80. 


ATTACK  ON  FOWLTOWN  69 

all  for  sending  a  force  against  Fowltown,  except 
that  he  had  invited  the  chief  to  visit  him,  in  or- 
der to  find  out  "whether  his  hostile  temper  had 
abated."  The  chief  refused  to  come.  The  friendly 
Indians  said  that  the  Fowltown  Indians  had  been 
hostile  ever  since  the  last  war.  Therefore  Gaines 
sent  a  force  equal  to  the  number  of  Indians  in  the 
town  "to  bring  the  chief  and  warriors,  and,  in 
the  event  of  resistance,  to  treat  them  as  enemies." 
When  the  Indians  saw  this  force  approaching  they 
fired  on  it,  stood  fire  once,  and  then  ran  away. 
Their  property  was  then  all  destroyed,  and  the 
United  States  had  an  Indian  war  on  its  hands. 

In  December,  on  receipt  of  intelligence  of  the 
battle  at  Fowltown  and  the  attack  on  the  boats, 
Jackson  was  ordered  to  take  command  in  Georgia. 
He  wrote  to  President  Monroe :  "  Let  it  be  signi- 
fied to  me  through  any  channel  (say  Mr.  J.  Khea  *) 
that  the  possession  of  the  Floridas  would  be  desir- 
able to  the  United  States,  and  in  sixty  days  it 
will  be  accomplished."  Much  was  afterwards 
made  to  depend  on  this  letter.  Monroe  was  ill 
when  it  reached  Washington,  and  he  did  not  see 
or  read  it  until  a  year  afterwards,  when  some  re- 
ference was  made  to  it.2  Jackson  construed  the 

1  This  name  is  found  at  the  head  of  a  movement,  in  1810,  to  set 
up  a  filibuster  state  in  Florida.     Rhea  signed  "  as  President  "  an 
application,  dated  at  Baton  Rouge,  for  the  admission  of  such  state 
to  the  Union.     It  is  couched  in  such  terms  as  to  call  for  the  covert 
approval  of  the  United  States  before  becoming  explicit.     7  Wait's 
State  Papers,  482. 

2  8  Adams,  249. 


70  ANDREW  JACKSON 

orders  which  he  received  from  Calhoun  from  the 
standpoint  of  this  letter.  He  also  afterwards  af- 
firmed that  Ehea  wrote  to  him  that  the  President 
approved  of  his  suggestions ; l  but  he  could  not  pro- 
duce that  letter.  He  had  burned  it.2  He  certainly 
supposed,  however,  that  he  had  the  secret  concur- 
rence of  the  administration  in  conquering  Florida. 
In  1811  orders  were  given  to  General  Matthews  to 
sound  the  inhabitants  of  East  Florida  as  to  coming 
into  the  Union  ;  also  not  to  let  any  foreign  nation 
occupy  Florida.3  Any  one  who  knew  this  might 
well  infer  that  the  authorities  at  Washington  would 
not  be  scrupulous  about  invading  Florida. 

When  the  orders  to  take  command  reached 
Jackson,  the  Governor  of  Tennessee  was  absent 
from  Nashville.  Jackson  proceeded  to  raise  troops 
in  Tennessee  on  his  own  responsibility ;  he  being 
authorized  to  call  on  the  governors  of  the  States 
which  were  neighbors  to  the  scene  of  war.  He 
pushed  on  his  preparations  with  great  energy  and 

1  8  Adams,  404. 

2  Memorandum  by  Jackson,  1837.     He  told  Henry  Lee,  who 
was  astonished  that  he  had  burned  the  letter,  that "  it  was  at  the 
earnest  personal  request  of  Mr.  Rhea,  and  Mr.  Rhea  stated  at  the 
earnest  request  of  Mr.  Munroe,  as  my  health  was  delicate  and  I 
might  die  without  destroying  that  confidential  letter,  which  was 
strictly  confidential  and  I  had  promised  him  that  as  soon  as  I 
reached  home  I  would  burn  it  —  and  having  so  promised  I  did 
burn  and  made  that  memorandum  on  the  margin  to  show  I  had 
complied  with  my  promise."     He  wanted  Lee  to  testify  that  he 
had  seen  the  entry  on  the  margin  of  the  letter-book  opposite  Jack- 
Bon's  letter  to  Monroe.    Ford  MSS. 

8  9  WaitV  State  Papers,  41. 


NOTIONS  ABOUT  SPANIARDS  71 

celerity.  His  acts  were  approved  both  by  the  State 
and  federal  authorities.  He  advanced  through 
Georgia  with  great  haste,  and  was  on  the  Florida 
frontier  in  March,  1818.  He  ordered  part  of  his 
provisions  sent  to  Fort  Scott  by  the  Appalachicola, 
on  which  the  Spaniards  had  no  fort,  and  he  sent 
word  to  the  Spanish  commander  at  Pensacola  that, 
if  the  fort  at  Barrancas  hindered  his  supply  boats 
from  ascending  the  Escambia,  he  should  consider 
it  an  act  of  hostility  to  the  United  States.  These 
were,  to  say  the  least,  very  aggressive  proceedings 
against  a  nation  with  which  we  were  at  peace,  for 
a  man  who  had  been  thrown  into  paroxysms  of 
rage  and  energy  at  the  idea  of  a  redcoat  resting  on 
the  soil  of  Louisiana  during  a  public  war.  Jack- 
son immediately  advanced  to  St.  Mark's,  which 
place  he  captured.  On  his  way  down  the  Appala- 
chicola he  found  the  Indians  and  negroes  at  work 
in  the  fields,  and  unconscious  of  any  impending 
attack.  Some  of  them  fled  to  St.  Mark's.  His 
theory,  in  which  he  supposed  that  he  was  supported 
by  the  administration,  was  that  he  was  to  pursue 
the  Indians  until  he  caught  them,  wherever  they 
might  go  ;  that  he  was  to  respect  Spanish  rights 
as  far  as  he  could  consistently  with  that  purpose ; 
and  that  the  excuse  for  his  proceedings  was  that 
Spain  could  not  police  her  own  territory,  or  restrain 
the  Indians.  Jackson's  proceedings  were  based  on 
two  positive  but  arbitrary  assumptions  :  (1)  That 
the  Indians  got  aid  and  encouragement  from 
St.  Mark's  and  Pensacola.  (This  the  Spaniards 


72  ANDREW  JACKSON 

always  denied,  but  perhaps  another  assumption  of 
Jackson  might  be  mentioned  :  that  the  word  of  a 
Spanish  official  was  of  no  value.)  (2)  That  Great 
Britain  kept  paid  emissaries  employed  in  Florida 
to  stir  up  trouble  for  the  United  States.  This 
latter  assumption  was  a  matter  of  profound  belief 
generally  in  the  United  States.  Niles's  reports 
and  criticisms  of  events  in  Florida  all  proceed 
from  that  assumption.1  The  English  government 
disavowed  every  transaction  of  Colonel  Nichols 
with  the  Indians  which  took  definite  shape  and 
could  be  dealt  with  at  all.  The  Indians  whom  he 
took  to  England  were  kindly  treated,  but  were  not 
encouraged  to  look  to  England  for  any  assistance 
or  countenance.  It  was  not  easy  to  break  off  the 
connections  which  had  been  established,  and  destroy 
the  hopes  which  had  been  raised,  during  the  war^ 
but  there  is  not  the  slightest  evidence  that  the 
English  government  did  not  act  in  good  faith,  or 
that  it  was  busy  in  such  contemptible  business  as 
employing  emissaries  to  stir  up  some  two  thou- 
sand savages  to  wage  a  frontier  war  on  the  United 
States,  after  peace  had  been  concluded.  Jackson's 
assumption,  however,  had  serious  import  for  two 
unfortunate  individuals. 

A  Scotchman,  Alexander  Arbuthnot,  was  found 
by  Jackson  in  St.  Mark's.  When  the  fort  was 
taken,  Arbuthnot  mounted  his  horse  to  ride  away, 
but  he  was  seized,  and  put  in  confinement.  He 
was  an  Indian  trader,  who  had  been  in  Florida  for 
1  14  Niles ;  all  the  articles  on  Florida. 


ARBUTHNOT  AND   AMBRISTER  73 

many  years.  He  had  established  as  intimate  and 
friendly  relations  as  possible  with  the  Indians  for 
his  own  security  and  advantage  in  trade.  He  had 
also  sympathized  with  the  Indians,  and  had  exerted 
himself  in  their  behalf  in  many  quarters. 

Several  American  vessels  of  war  lay  in  the  bay 
of  St.  Mark's  to  cooperate  with  the  land  forces. 
By  displaying  English  colors  on  these  ships,  two 
Indian  chiefs,  Hillis  Hajo  (or  Francis)  and  Himol- 
lemico,  were  enticed  on  board  and  made  prisoners. 
They  were  hung  by  Jackson's  order.  They  had 
tortured  and  massacred  prisoners  after  the  Indian 
fashion,  but  no  one  has  ever  explained  by  what  law 
or  usage  known  in  the  service  of  the  United  States 
they  were  put  to  death,  when  thus  captured,  not 
even  on  the  field  of  battle,  but  by  a  very  question- 
able trick. 

Jackson  pushed  on  with  the  least  possible  delay 
to  the  Suwanee  River,  where  were  the  headquarters 
of  Boleck  (Billy  Bowlegs),  the  Seminole  chief. 
Arbuthnot  had  a  trading-post  there.  When  he 
had  heard  of  Jackson's  advance,  he  had  written 
to  his  son,  who  was  his  agent  at  Boleck's  village, 
to  carry  the  goods  across  the  river.  Through 
this  letter  the  Indians  got  warning  in  time  to  cross 
the  river  and  take  to  the  swamps.  Their  escape 
enraged  Jackson.  He  had  already  regarded  Ar- 
buthnot as  one  of  the  British  emissaries.  He  now 
considered  Arbuthnot's  letter  an  overt  act  of  in- 
terference in  the  war.  The  town  was  burned  by 
Jackson.  In  its  neighborhood  he  captured  an 


74  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Englishman  named  Robert  Ambrister,  an  ex-lieu- 
tenant in  the  British  marines,  and  nephew  of  the 
Governor  of  New  Providence.  This  man  was  car- 
ried as  a  prisoner  to  St.  Mark's,  the  troops  being 
on  their  way  home,  and  the  war  being  over.  A 
court-martial  was  convened  at  St.  Mark's.  Arbuth- 
not  was  tried  for  (1)  inciting  the  Creek  Indians 
to  war  against  the  United  States  ;  (2)  being  a  spy 
and  aiding  the  enemy;  (3)  inciting  the  Indians 
to  murder  two  white  men  named.  The  court  found 
him  guilty  of  the  first  charge  and  of  the  second 
except  of  being  a  spy,  and  condemned  him  to  be 
hung.  There  was  no  evidence  at  all  against  him 
on  any  charge.1  His  business  in  Florida  was  open 
and  obvious.  He  had  always  advised  the  Indians 
to  peace  and  submission.  His  letter  to  his  son  was 
not  open  to  censure.  Can  traders  be  executed  if 
their  information,  not  transmitted  through  the  lines, 
frustrates  military  purposes  ?  As  Arbuthnot  con- 
strued the  Treaty  of  Ghent  the  Indians  were  to 
have  their  lands  restored,  and  he  told  them  so. 
There  was  so  much  room  for  this  construction  that 
diplomatic  measures  were  necessary  to  set  it  aside. 
Peace  had  been  made  with  the  Creeks  before  the 
Treaty  of  Ghent  was  made. 

Ambrister  was  tried  for  inciting  the  Indians  and 
levying  war.  His  case  was  different.  He  had  no 
ostensible  business  in  Florida.  He  was  an  a&ven- 

1  Report  of  the  trial  in  full,  15  Niles,  270.  All  the  documents 
about  the  Negro  Fort  and  the  invasion  of  Florida  are  in  Docu- 
ment A. 


CAPTURE  OF  PENSACOLA  75 

turer,  and  it  is  not  clear  what  he  hoped  or  intended. 
He  threw  himself  on  the  mercy  of  the  court.  He 
was  condemned  to  be  shot.  This  sentence  was 
reconsidered,  and  he  was  then  condemned  to  fifty 
lashes  and  a  year  of  hard  labor.  Jackson  disap- 
proved of  the  reconsideration,  revived  the  first 
sentence,  and  ordered  both  men  to  be  executed. 
April  29, 1818,  he  left  St.  Mark's,  having  detached 
a  force  to  hold  that  place  and  to  execute  the  sen- 
tence. The  same  day  both  men  were  executed. 
Arbuthnot  was  seventy  years  old ;  Ambrister  was 
thirty-three. 

It  was  as  a  mere  incident  of  his  homeward  march 
that  Jackson  turned  aside  and  captured  Pensacola, 
May  24,  1818,  because  he  was  told  that  some 
Indians  had  taken  refuge  there.  He  deposed  the 
Spanish  government,  set  up  a  new  one,  and  estab- 
lished a  garrison.  He  then  continued  his  march 
homewards.  On  his  way  he  heard  of  an  attack 
by  Georgia  militia  on  the  villages  of  friendly  and 
allied  Indians,  and  he  became  engaged  in  a  fiery 
correspondence  with  Governor  Rabun  of  Georgia 
about  that  affair.1  He  was  in  the  right,  but  it 
was  another  case  in  which  by  violence  he  pro- 
voked anger  and  discord,  when  he  might  have 
accomplished  much  more  by  a  temperate  remon- 
strance. 

In  the  whole  Florida  matter  we  see  Jackson  pro- 
ceeding to  summary  measures  on  inadequate  facts 
and  information.  He  "knew"  how  the  matter 
1  Documents  in  the  Supplement  to  15  Niles,  56. 


76  ANDREW  JACKSON 

stood  by  the  current  prejudices  and  assumptions, 
not  by  evidence  and  information.  This  was  the 
tone  of  his  mind.  Notions  and  prepossessions 
which  once  effected  a  lodgment  in  his  mind,  because 
circumstances  gave  them  a  certain  plausibility,  or 
because  they  fell  in  with  some  general  prejudice  or 
personal  bias  of  his,  immediately  gained  for  him 
the  character  of  obvious  facts  or  self-evident  truths. 
He  then  pursued  such  notions  and  prepossessions 
to  their  last  consequences,  and  woe  to  any  one  who 
wtood  in  the  way.1 

General  Jackson  had,  in  five  months,  broken 
the  Indian  power,  established  peace  on  the  border, 
and  substantially  conquered  Florida.  This  five 
months  and  the  eighteen  months  service  in  1813-15 
were  all  the  actual  service  he  ever  saw.  The  Semi- 
nole  war  was,  in  its  relations  and  effects,  one  of  the 
most  important  events  in  our  history,  but  in  itself 
it  was  one  of  the  most  insignificant  of  our  Indian 
campaigns.  Jackson  had  an  overwhelming  force. 
The  report  of  the  Senate  committee  of  1819  puts 
his  force  at  1,800  whites  and  1,500  friendly  In- 
dians. The  hostile  Indians  were  never  put  by 
anybody  at  a  higher  number  than  2,000.  This 
committee  put  them  at  1,000,  not  over  half  of 
whom,  at  any  one  time,  were  in  front  of  Jackson. 
The  allied  Indians  did  all  the  fighting.  They  lost 

1  "It  was  easy  to  see  that  he  was  not  a  man  to  accept  a 
difference  of  opinion  with  equanimity,  but  that  was  clearly  be- 
cause, he  being  honest  and  earnest,  Heaven  would  not  suffer  his 
opinions  to  be  other  than  right."  Quincy ;  Figures,  355. 


THE  SEMINOLE  CAMPAIGN  77 

twenty  men  in  the  campaign.  Not  one  white  man 
was  killed.  The  number  of  hostile  Indians  killed 
is  put  at  sixty.1 

The  trouble  with  Jackson's  achievements  was 
that  he  had  done  too  much.  The  statesmen  and 
diplomatists  could  not  keep  up  with  him,  and  the 
tasks  he  threw  on  them  were  harder  than  those  he 
performed  in  the  field.  The  administration  was 
not  aware  that  it  had  authorized  him  to  violate 
neutral  territory.  Federal  administrations  in  those 
days  were  always  timid.  They  did  not  know  the 
limits  of  their  power,  or  what  they  dared  do. 
Monroe  was  especially  timid.  His  administration 
wanted  to  buy  Florida,  not  conquer  it.  They  did 
not  thank  Jackson  for  plunging  them  into  such  a 
difficulty  with  Congress  and  with  England  and 
Spain  all  at  once.  The  two  Indian  captives  who 
had  been  hung  had  no  friends,  but  their  execution 
was  an  awkward  thing  to  justify  before  the  civilized 
world.  The  execution  of  the  two  Englishmen  was 
likely  to  provoke  a  great  deal  of  diplomatic  trouble. 
Jackson  had  been  perfectly  sure  about  the  law. 
He  laid  it  down  in  the  order  for  the  execution. 
"  It  is  an  established  principle  of  the  law  of  nations 
that  any  individual  of  a  nation  making  war  against 
the  citizens  of  any  other  nation,  they  being  at 
peace,  forfeits  his  allegiance,  and  becomes  an  out- 
law and  a  pirate."  If  the  facts  are  admitted,  such 
a  person  undoubtedly  forfeits  his  allegiance,  and 
cannot  demand  the  protection  of  his  sovereign, 
1  Perkins,  113. 


78  ANDREW  JACKSON 

whatever  may  happen  to  him.  On  this  ground 
the  English  government  took  no  steps  in  relation 
to  the  execution  of  Arbuthnot  and  Ambrister,  be- 
yond an  inquiry  into  the  facts  of  their  alleged 
complicity  in  the  war,1  and  that  inquiry  was  not 
pushed  as  we  may  hope  that  the  government  of 
the  United  States  will  push  the  inquiry,  if  an 
American  citizen  is  ever  executed  as  Arbuthnot  was. 
The  doctrine  of  Jackson's  order,  that  a  person  who 
engages  in  a  war  to  which  his  country  is  not  a 
party  becomes  an  outlaw  and  pirate,  will  not  stand. 
As  has  been  well  said,  there  were  a  large  number 
of  foreigners  in  the  American  army  during  the 
Revolution,  who,  on  this  doctrine,  would,  if  cap- 
tured by  the  English,  have  forfeited  their  lives. 
The  United  States  would  have  protected  any  such 
persons  by  retaliation  or  otherwise.  The  Creeks 
were  not  a  nation  in  international  law,  they  were 
not  the  possessors  of  the  soil  on  which  they  lived 
and  fought ;  there  had  never  been  a  declaration  of 
war ;  yet  they  were  not  rebels  against  the  United 
States,  and  it  could  not  be  denied  that  they  had 
some  belligerent  rights.  Whatever  rights  they 
had,  the  Englishmen,  even  if  they  had  been  com- 
plete and  unquestioned  allies,  must  also  have  been 
entitled  to  from  the  American  authorities.  If, 
then,  the  Indians  were  not  to  be  hunted  down 
like  wild  beasts,  or  executed  by  court-martial,  if 
captured,  for  levying  war  on  the  United  States, 

1  1  Hush,  473.     "War  might  have  been  produced  on  this  oo- 
easion  '  if  the  ministry  had  but  held  up  a  finger.'  "     (488.) 


JACKSON'S  INTERNATIONAL  LAW          79 

the  Englishmen  were  executed  without  right  or 
law.  There  never  was  any  proof  that  anybody 
incited  the  Indians.  The  attack  on  Fowltown  pre- 
cipitated hostilities  in  a  situation  where  lawless 
men  and  savages,  by  mutual  annoyance,  outrage, 
and  retaliation,  had  prepared  the  warlike  temper. 
When  the  matter  was  investigated  this  appeared, 
and  it  was  seen  that  Jackson  had  acted  unjus- 
tifiably, because  without  evidence  or  law.  The 
popular  feeling,  however,  would  not  allow  him 
to  be  censured.  Niles,  who  well  represents  the  pop- 
ular temper,  believed  in  the  emissary  theory,  and 
when  that  theory  broke  down  he  became  angry.1 
He  also  expressed  the  popular  feeling  with  great 
exactness  in  this  paragraph :  "  The  fact  is  that 
ninety-nine  in  a  hundred  of  the  people  believe 
that  General  Jackson  acted  on  every  occasion  for 
the  good  of  his  country,  and  success  universally 
crowned  his  efforts.  He  has  suffered  more  hard- 
ships, and  encountered  higher  responsibilities,  than 
any  man  living  in  the  United  States  to  serve  us, 
and  has  his  reward  in  the  sanction  of  his  govern- 
ment and  the  approbation  of  the  people."  "With 
this  dictum  the  case  was  dismissed,  and  the  matter 
stood  so  that  General  Jackson,  having  done  im- 
portant public  military  service,  could  not  be  called 
to  account,  although  he  had  hung  four  persons 
without  warrant  of  law.  His  popularity  had  al- 
ready begun  to  exercise  a  dispensing  power  in  his 
favor.  A  committee  of  the  House  of  Representa- 

i  See  his  editorial,  16  Niles,  25. 


80  ANDREW  JACKSON 

lives,1  at  the  next  session,  reported  a  vote  of  censure 
on  him  for  the  execution  of  the  Englishmen,  but 
the  House,  after  a  long  debate,  refused  to  pass  it. 

Jackson's  proceedings  came  up  in  Monroe's  cab- 
inet on  the  question  what  to  do  with  him  and  his 
conquests.  Calhoun  was  vexed  at  Jackson's  insub- 
ordination to  the  War  Department.  He  wanted 
Jackson  censured.  The  President  and  the  whole 
cabinet,  with  the  exception  of  Adams,  disapproved 
of  Jackson's  conduct  in  invading  Florida,  and 
were  ready  to  disavow  his  proceedings  and  make 
reparation.2  On  Adams  would  fall  the  labor  of 
vindicating  Jackson's  proceedings  diplomatically, 
if  the  administration  should  assume  the  responsi- 
bility for  them.  He  avowed  himself  ready  to 
undertake  the  task,  and  to  perform  it  substantially 
on  the  grounds  on  which  Jackson  justified  him 
self.  It  was  agreed  that  Pensacola  and  St.  Mark's 
should  be  restored  to  Spain,  but  that  Jackson's 
course  should  be  approved  and  defended  on  the 
grounds  that  he  pursued  his  enemy  to  his  ref- 
uge, and  that  Spain  could  not  do  the  duty  which 
devolved  on  her.  The  President,  however,  coun- 
termanded an  order  which  Jackson  had  given  to 
Gaines  to  seize  St.  Augustine  because  some  Indians 
had  taken  refuge  there.  All  the  members  of  the 
cabinet  agreed  to  the  policy  decided  on,  and  all 
loyally  adhered  to  it,  the  secret  of  their  first  opinion 
being  preserved  for  ten  years.  Calhoun  wrote  to 
Jackson  in  accordance  with  the  agreement,  con- 
i  15  NUes,  394.  2  2  Gallatin's  Writings,  117. 


SEMINOLE  WAR  IN  CONGRESS  81 

gratulating  and  approving.  Jackson  inferred  that 
Calhoun  had  been  his  friend  in  the  cabinet  all  the 
time,  and  that  his  old  enemy,  Crawford,  had  been 
the  head  of  the  hostile  party.  "  There  is  one  fact 
I  wish  Mr.  Munroe  to  know  —  that  Mr.  Wm.  H. 
Crawford,  whatever  his  pretensions  are,  is  not  his 
friend  —  and  facts  can  be  produced  on  this  head  — 
I  know  he  is  my  enemy  —  and  I  also  know  he 
is  a  base  man  —  "  1  The  political  history  of  this 
country  was  permanently  affected  by  the  personal 
relations  of  Jackson  to  Calhoun  and  Crawford  on 
that  matter.  Monroe  had  a  long  correspondence 
with  Jackson  to  try  to  reconcile  him  to  the  surren- 
der of  the  forts  to  Spain.  In  that  correspondence 
Jackson  did  not  mention  the  Rhea  letter. 

At  the  next  session  of  Congress  (1818-19)  the 
proceedings  in  Florida  were  made  the  subject  of 
inquiry,  and  were  at  once  involved  in  the  politics 
of  the  day.  Clay  was  in  opposition  to  the  adminis- 
tration because  he  had  not  been  made  Secretary  of 
State.  He  refused  the  War  Department  and  the 
mission  to  England.  His  opposition  was  factious. 
After  the  administration  assumed  the  responsibility 
for  Jackson's  doings,  Clay  opened  the  attack  011 
them.  Here  began  the  feud  between  Clay  and 
Jackson.  The  latter  was  in  a  doubly  irritable 
state  of  mind  between  the  flatterers  on  one  side 
and  the  critics  on  the  other.  The  personal  element 
came  to  the  front.  Any  one  who  approved  of  his 
acts  was  his  friend ;  any  one  who  criticised  was  his 
1  Ford  MSS.  Jackson  to  Lewis,  Dec.  8, 1817. 


82  ANDREW  JACKSON 

enemy ;  whether  any  personal  feeling  was  brought 
to  the  discussion  of  a  question  of  law  and  fact  or 
not.  There  are  some  facts  which  look  as  if  Clay 
and  Crawford  had  begun  to  regard  Jackson  as  a 
possible  competitor  for  the  presidency.  Crawford 
was  in  communication  with  the  committees  on  the 
Seminole  war,  apparently  instigating  action,  while 
Calhoun  tried  to  quell  the  excitement  and  avert 
action,  out  of  loyalty  to  the  decision  adopted  by 
the  administration  of  which  he  was  a  member.1 
The  Georgian  friends  of  Crawford  in  Congress 
led  the  attack  on  Jackson.2  Crawford  and  Cal- 
houn were  enemies.  Adams  was  writing  dispatches 
and  preparing  instructions,  by  which,  both  with 
England  and  Spain,  he  succeeded  in  vindicating 
Jackson's  proceedings.  He  said  that  he  could  not 
regard  a  man  of  Jackson's  distinguished  services 
like  any  other  man.3  He  therefore  yielded  to  the 
prevailing  current  of  the  time,  and  incurred  a  large 
responsibility  for  saving  Jackson  from  censure, 
and  making  possible  his  later  career.  He  and 
Jackson  were,  at  this  time,  friends,  and  one  scheme 
was  to  make  Jackson  Vice-President  on  a  ticket 
with  Adams.4  Adams's  defence  of  Jackson  was 

1  See  Lacock's  letter  of  June  25,  1832,  in  answer  to  Jackson's 
interrogatories.  43  Niles,  79. 

a  8  Adams,  240.  8  5  Adams,  473. 

4  Adams  said  (in  1824)  that  the  vice-presidency  would  be  a 
nice  place  for  Jackson's  old  age.  Jackson  was  four  months  older 
than  Adams.  This  is  not  so  ridiculous  as  it  would  be  if  Jackson 
had  not  pleaded  old  age  and  illness  as  a  reason  why  he  should  not 
go  to  the  Senate  in  1823.  See  6  Adams,  633. 


SEMINOLE  WAR  IN  CONGRESS  83 

very  plausible,  and  it  was  fortified  line  by  line 
with  references  to  the  documentary  proofs,  yet  if 
it  had  been  worth  any  one's  while,  either  in  Eng- 
land or  this  country,  to  examine  the  alleged  proofs, 
as  any  one  may  do  now,  verifying  his  references, 
all  the  case  against  Arbuthnot  would  have  been 
found  baseless.  Adams  quotes  a  certain  letter  as 
proof  that  Arbuthnot  was  not  truly  a  trader,  but 
had  concealed  purposes.  The  letter  bears  no  testi- 
mony at  all  to  the  fact  alleged.1  Kush  cited  to 
the  English  minister  another  proof  of  this,  which 
is  equally  frail,  and  only  proves  that  Arbuthnot 
had  taken  trouble  to  try  to  serve  the  Indians  out 
of  pity  for  them.2  His  letter  to  his  son,  be- 
sides warning  him  to  save  as  much  as  possible  of 
their  property,  contained  a  message  to  Boleck  not 
to  resist  the  Americans.3  The  Senate  committee 
reported  February  24,  1819  (Lacock's  Report), 
strongly  against  Jackson  on  all  the  points  from 
the  independent  recruiting  down  to  the  taking 
of  Pensacola.4  No  action  was  taken.  Jackson 
had  been  in  Washington  during  the  winter  watch- 
ing the  proceedings.  He  attended  one  of  the 
President's  drawing-rooms.  "From  the  earnest- 
ness with  which  the  company  pressed  round  him, 
the  eagerness  with  which  multitudes  pushed  to 
obtain  personal  introductions  to  him,  and  the  eye 
of  respect  and  gratitude  which  from  every  quarter 

1  Document  A,  20,  cf.  147. 

2  2  Rush,  52,  cf.  Document  A,  215. 

8  Document  A,  137.  *  16  NUes,  33. 


84  ANDREW  JACKSON 

beamed  upon  .him,  it  had  as  much  the  appearance 
of  being  his  drawing-room  as  the  President's." l 
In  February  he  made  an  excursion  as  far  north 
as  New  York.  He  was  received  everywhere  with 
enthusiasm.  There  was  a  story  that  he  was  so 
angry  at  some  of  the  proceedings  in  censure  of 
him  that  he  went  to  the  Senate  chamber  to  waylay 
some  persons  who  had  displeased  him.  He  denied 
this. 

In  1819  the  purchase  of  Florida  was  effected, 
although  the  treaty  was  not  ratified  until  February 
22,  1821.  In  this  treaty  the  western  boundary  of 
the  Louisiana  purchase  was  for  the  first  time  de- 
fined. Adams,  while  the  negotiations  were  pend- 
ing, consulted  Jackson  about  the  boundary  to  be 
contended  for.  Jackson  "  said  there  were  many 
persons  who  would  take  exception  to  our  receding 
so  far  from  the  boundary  of  the  Rio  del  Norte, 
which  we  claim,  as  the  Sabine,  and  the  enemies  of 
the  administration  would  certainly  make  a  handle 
of  it  to  assail  them ;  but  the  possession  of  the 
Florid  as  was  of  so  great  importance  to  the  south- 
ern frontier  of  the  United  States,  and  so  essential 
even  to  their  safety,  that  the  vast  majority  of  the 
nation  would  be  satisfied  with  the  western  bound- 
ary as  we  propose,  if  we  obtain  the  Floridas."2 
Monroe  and  his  cabinet  seem  to  have  cared  just  as 
little  for  Texas.  Adams's  diary  shows  that  he  was 
not  heartily  supported  in  the  efforts  he  was  willing 
to  make  to  push  the  line  westward.  Jackson's 
1  4  Adams,  243.  2  Adams,  238-9. 


JACKSON  IN  FLORIDA  85 

opinion  about  claiming  Texas  was  of  no  value,  but 
the  fact  that  he  was  consulted  showed  the  amount 
of  respect  and  consideration  which  the  administra- 
tion was  willing  to  pay  to  him.  In  1836,  and  again 
in  1843,  Adams,  citing  his  diary,  declared  that 
Jackson  had  been  consulted,  and  had  approved  the 
Florida  treaty.  Jackson  contradicted  and  denied 
it  in  a  violent  and  insulting  manner. 

In  the  spring  of  1821  Jackson  was  appointed 
Governor  of  Florida,  under  the  belief  that  the 
public  would  be  glad  to  see  him  so  honored.  On 
July  21st  of  the  same  year  he  published  general 
orders,1  taking  leave  of  his  army,  a  reduction  hav- 
ing been  made  by  which  he  had  been  thrown  out. 
In  these  orders,  or  in  a  postscript  to  them,  he  man- 
aged to  come  into  collision  with  his  colleague  and 
senior,  Major-General  Brown,  then  chief  in  com- 
mand of  the  army  of  the  United  States,  by  taking 
up  and  criticising  an  order  "  signed  Jacob  Brown," 
especially  in  regard  to  the  punishment  for  deser- 
tion. Brown  was  a  New  York  militia  general,  some 
eight  years  younger  than  Jackson,  who  had  dis- 
tinguished himself,  in  the  general  ill-success  of  the 
war,  by  some  small  successes  on  the  northern  fron- 
tier. He  seemed  to  be  the  coming  military  hero  of 
the  war  until  he  was  eclipsed  by  Jackson.  He 
took  precedence  of  Jackson  by  seniority  of  appoint- 
ment, and  so  became  chief  in  command.  It  had 
become  evident  now  that  Jackson  needed  much 
room  in  the  world  for  all  his  jealousies  and  ani- 
1  21  Niles,  53. 


86  ANDREW  JACKSON 

mosities,  and  that  his  fellow-men  must  put  up  with 
a  great  deal  of  arrogance  and  misbehavior  on  his 
part.  His  popularity  shielded  him.  He  had  be- 
come a  privileged  person,  like  a  great  French 
nobleman  of  the  last  century.  To  offend  him  was 
to  incur  extraordinary  penalties.  To  get  in  his 
way  was  to  expose  one's  self  to  assaults  which 
could  not  be  resented  as  they  would  be  if  they 
came  from  another  man.  All  this  he  had  won  by 
military  success.  At  least  it  seemed  fair  to  expect 
that  he  would  observe  military  discipline  and  de- 
corum. But  he  did  not  do  so,  and  no  one  dared  to 
call  him  to  account. 

Congress  did  not  have  time  to  legislate  for  the 
territory  of  Florida,  after  the  treaty  was  ratified, 
before  the  end  of  the  session.  An  act  was  passed 
extending  to  the  new  territory  only  the  revenue 
laws  and  the  law  against  the  slave-trade.  Jackson 
was  appointed  Governor  in  April,  with  all  the 
powers  of  the  Captain-General  of  Cuba  and  the 
Spanish  Governors  of  Florida,  except  that  he  could 
not  lay  taxes  or  grant  land.1  His  position  was 
therefore  a  very  anomalous  one,  —  an  American 
Governor  under  Spanish  law,  of  an  American  terri- 
tory not  yet  under  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the 
United  States.  Long  delays,  due  to  dilatoriness 
and  inefficiency,  postponed  the  actual  cession  until 
July  17th.  Meanwhile  Jackson  was  chafing  and 
fuming,  and  strengthening  his  detestation  of  all 
Spaniards. 

1  His  commission  in  full,  22  Niles,  Supp.  148. 


GOVERNOR  OF  FLORIDA  87 

In  September  certain  persons  represented  to 
Jackson  that  papers  which  were  necessary  for  the 
protection  of  their  interests  were  being  packed  up, 
and  would  be  carried  away  by  the  Spanish  ex-Gov- 
ernor, contrary  to  the  treaty.  There  were  five  or 
six  sets  of  papers  about  property  and  land  grants 1 
which  were  missing.  There  had  been  complaints 
against  the  Spaniards  for  granting  lands  belonging 
to  the  Crown  between  the  making  and  the  ratifica- 
tion of  the  treaty.  Jackson  no  doubt  believed  the 
worst  against  them.  The  persons  who  claimed  his 
aid  were  weak  and  poor.  With  characteristic 
chivalry  and  impetuosity,  he  ,sent  an  officer  to  seize 
the  papers.  The  ex-Governor,  Callava,  refused  to 
give  up  any  papers  unless  they  were  described,  and 
a  demand  for  them  was  addressed  to  him  as  Span- 
ish commissioner.  He  and  Jackson  seem  to  have 
worked  at  cross-purposes  unnecessarily.  It  is  hard 
to  make  out  what  the  misunderstanding  was  (al- 
though the  use  of  two  languages  might  partly  ac- 
count for  it),  unless  Jackson  was  acting  under 
his  anti-Spanish  bias.  Jackson  ended  by  sending 
Callava  to  the  calaboose.  Parton,  who  gives  some 
special  and  interesting  details  derived  from  Brack- 
enridge,  the  alcalde  and  interpreter,  says  that  Cal- 
lava saw  the  ridiculous  side  of  the  affair,  and  that 
he  and  his  friends  "made  a  night  of  it"  in  the 
calaboose.  Jackson  sent  an  officer  to  Callava's 
house  to  take  the  papers,  and  then  ordered  Callava 
to  be  discharged. 

1  21  Niles,  150. 


88  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Eligius  Fromentin,  of  Louisiana,  had  been  ap- 
pointed judge  of  the  western  district  of  Florida. 
He,  upon  application,  issued  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
for  Callava.  Jackson  summoned  Fromentin  before 
him  to  show  cause  why  he  had  interfered  with  Jack- 
son's authority  as  Governor  of  the  Floridas  with 
the  powers  of  the  Captain-General  of  Cuba,  as 
"  Supreme  Judge,"  and  as  "  Chancellor."  Fro- 
mentin sent  an  excuse  on  the  ground  of  illness. 
The  next  day  he  went  to  see  Jackson,  and  after  a 
fierce  interview  each  prepared  a  "  statement "  to 
send  to  Washington.  Callava  went  to  Washing- 
ton to  seek  satisfaction.  Some  of  his  friends  pub- 
lished, at  Pensacola,  a  statement  in  his  defence. 
Thereupon  Jackson  ordered  them  out  of  Florida  at 
four  days'  notice,  on  pain  of  arrest  for  contempt 
and  disobedience,  if  they  were  found  there  later. 
After  all,  the  heirs  of  Vidal,  who  stirred  up  the 
whole  trouble,  were,  according  to  Parton,  indebted 
to  the  Forbes  firm,  against  which  they  wanted  to 
protect  themselves.1  This  would  not  affect  their 
right  and  interest  in  securing  papers  properly 
theirs.  Whether  the  papers  were  being  carried 
away,  and  did  properly  belong  to  the  claimants,  is 
not  known.2 

"  I  have  no  time,"  wrote  Jackson  to  Lewis,  Sept. 
21,  1821,  "  to  write  to  a  friend,  my  civil,  military, 

1  2  Parton,  638.     See  Vidal's  Heirs  vs.  J.  Innerarity,  22  Niles, 
Supp.  147. 

2  All  the  documents  are  in  Folio  State  Papers,  2  Miscellan^ 
199.     The  important  papers  are  in  21  Niles. 


AFFAIR  OF  CALLAVA  89 

and  Judicial  Functions  keep  me  constantly  en- 
gaged as  you  will  see  from  the  news  papers,  that  I 
am  on  some  occasions  for  Justice  sake,  to  use  en- 
ergetic measures,  but  one  thing  you  and  my  friends 
may  rely  on,  that  I  have  acted  with  great  caution 
and  prudence,  and  that  my  conduct  when  investi- 
gated will  be  as  much  approved  as  any  act  of  my 
life." 

About  the  time  of  the  trouble  with  Callava, 
Worthington,  the  Secretary  and  acting  Governor 
of  East  Florida,  was  having  a  contest  with  Coppin- 
ger,  the  Spanish  Governor  of  East  Florida,  about 
papers  which  the  former  seized  under  Jackson's 
orders. 

Here,  then,  was  another  trouble  which  Jackson 
had  prepared,  in  about  six  months'  service,  for  his 
unhappy  superiors.  He  was  ill  and  disgusted  with 
his  office.  He  resigned  and  went  home  in  Octo- 
ber. It  is  plain  that  he  had  acted  from  a  good 
motive  against  Callava,  and,  being  sure  of  his  mo- 
tive, he  had  disregarded  diplomatic  obligations, 
evidence,  law,  propriety,  and  forms  of  procedure. 
Those  things  only  enraged  him  because  they  balked 
him  of  the  quick  purpose,  born  of  his  sense  of  jus- 
tice, and  of  his  sympathy  with  an  ex  parte  appeal 
to  his  power.  Such  a  man  is  a  dangerous  person 
to  be  endowed  with  civil  power.  As  to  his  quarrel 
with  Fromentin,  it  was  a  farce.  If  Jackson  had 
been  a  man  of  any  introspection,  he  must  have 
had,  ever  after,  more  charity  for  the  whole  class  of 
Spanish  governors,  when  he  saw  what  an  arrogant 


90  ANDREW  JACKSON 

fool  he  had  made  of  himself  while  endowed  with 
indefinite  and  irresponsible  power.1 

Monroe's  cabinet  unanimously  agreed  that,  as 
the  only  laws  which  had  been  extended  to  Florida 
were  the  revenue  laws  and  those  against  the  slave- 
trade,  Fromentin's  jurisdiction  was  limited  to  those 
laws,2  and  he  could  not  issue  a  writ  of  habeas  cor- 
pus. The  President,  Calhoun,  and  Wirt  thought 
that  he  was  not  amenable  for  his  error  to  Jackson. 
Adams  took  Jackson's  part  in  this  matter  also. 
He  said  that  Fromentin  had  violated  Jackson's 
authority.3  The  cabinet  discussed  the  subject  for 
three  days  without  reaching  a  decision.  They 
were  greatly  perplexed  as  to  the  law  and  justice  of 
the  matter,  and  also  as  to  its  political  effect.  Con- 
gress took  it  up,  and  the  newspapers  were  filled 
with  it.  At  first  the  tide  of  opinion  was  against 
Jackson,  but  his  popularity  reacted  against  it,  and 
the  affair  did  not  hurt  him. 

In  1823  Jackson  was  offered  the  mission  to 
Mexico.  He  declined  it.  Soon  afterwards  he 
published  in  the  Mobile  "  Eegister  "  a  letter  stat- 
ing his  reasons  for  declining.  These  reasons  were 
a  reflection  on  the  administration,  because  they 
showed  cause  why  no  mission  ought  to  be  sent. 
The  letter  was  calculated  to  win  capital  out  of  the 

1  "  Although  inebriety  may  be  necessary  to  awaken  the  brute 
in  man,  absolute  power  suffices  to  bring  out  the  fool."     Taine, 
3  Revolution,  267. 

2  For  Fromentin's  own  theory  of  his  action,  which  was  plainly 
•erroneous,  see  21  Niles,  252. 

»  5  Adams,  359,  368  to  380. 


MISSION  TO  MEXICO  91 

appointment  at  the  expense  of  the  administration 
which  had  made  it.1  Monroe  must  have  been  often 
reminded  of  what  Jefferson  said  to  him,  in  1818, 
when  he  asked  whether  it  would  not  be  wise  to 
give  Jackson  the  mission  to  Russia  :  "  Why,  good 
G — d,  he  would  Dieed  you  a  quarrel  before  he 
had  been  there  a  month !  "  2 

1  24  NUes,  280.  2  4  Adams,  76. 


CHAPTER  IV 

ELECTION  OF  1824 

THE  Congressional  caucus  met  April  8,  1820. 
The  question  was  whether  to  nominate  any  candi- 
dates for  President  and  Vice-President.  Adams 
says  that  the  caucus  was  called  as  part  of  a  plan 
to  nominate  Clay  for  Vice-President.  About  forty 
members  of  Congress  attended.  K.  M.  Johnson 
offered  a  resolution  that  it  was  inexpedient  to 
nominate  candidates.  This  resolution  was  adopted, 
and  the  caucus  adjourned.1  Monroe  received,  at 
the  election,  every  electoral  vote  save  one,  which 
was  cast  by  Plumer,  in  New  Hampshire,  for  Adams. 
Tomkins  was  reflected  Vice-President,  but  he  re- 
ceived fourteen  less  votes  than  Monroe.  His  repu- 
tation was  declining.  In  raising  money  for  the 
public  service  during  the  war  he  had  engaged  his 
own  credit.  His  book-keeping  was  bad,  and  his 
accounts  and  the  public  accounts  became  so  entan- 
gled that  he  could  not  separate  them.2  The  trou- 
ble was  that,  in  order  to  show  himself  a  creditor, 
he  had  to  include  in  his  accounts  interest,  commis- 
sions, damages,  allowances,  etc.,  with  interest  on 
them  all  ;  that  is,  all  the  ordinary  and  extraordi- 
1  5  Adams,  58,  60.  2  1  Hammond,  508  et  seq. 


TARIFF  OF  1820  93 

nary  charges  which  a  broker  would  make  for  find- 
ing funds  for  an  embarrassed  client.  If  these 
charges  were  all  allowed,  Tomkins  could  claim  no 
credit  for  patriotism.  If  he  was  to  keep  the  credit 
of  extraordinary  patriotism,  he  was  a  debtor.  In 
1816  he  was  very  popular  and  had  high  hopes  of 
the  presidency.  In  1824  he  retired  neglected  and 
forgotten.  He  died  in  June,  1825. 

During  Monroe's  second  term  each  of  the  per- 
sonal factions  was  intriguing  on  behalf  of  its  chief, 
and  striving  to  kill  off  all  the  others.  There  were 
no  real  issues.  On  the  return  of  peace  in  1815,  the 
industries  which  had  grown  up  here  during  the 
war,  to  supply  needs  which  could  not,  under  the 
then  existing  laws,  be  supplied  by  importation,  found 
themselves  threatened  with  ruin.  The  tariff  of 
1816,  although  its  rates  were  of  course  far  below 
the  "  double  duties  "  which  had  been  levied  during 
the  war,  was  supposed  at  the  time  to  be  amply  pro- 
tective. It  had  been  planned  to  that  end.  The 
embargo,  non-intercourse,  and  war  had  created  en- 
tirely artificial  circumstances,  which  were  a  heavy 
burden  on  the  nation  as  a  whole,  but  which  had 
given  security  and  favor  to  certain  manufacturing 
industries.  There  was  no  way  to  "protect"  the 
industries  after  peace  returned  except  to  reproduce 
by  taxes  the  same  hardship  for  everybody  else, 
and  the  same  special  circumstances  for  the  favored 
industries,  as  had  been  produced  by  embargo  and 
war.  In  1819  a  great  commercial  crisis  occurred, 
which  prostrated  all  the  industry  of  the  country 


94  ANDREW  JACKSON 

for  four  or  five  years.  So  long  as  vicious  and  de- 
preciated currencies  existed  in  Europe,  there  was 
less  penalty  for  a  vicious  currency  here ;  but  as 
fast  as  European  currencies  improved  after  the 
return  of  peace,  gold  and  silver  began  to  go  to  the 
countries  of  improving  currency,  and  away  from 
the  countries  where  the  currency  still  remained 
bad.  The  "  hard  times  "  were  made  an  argument 
to  show  that  more  protection  was  needed ;  that  is, 
that  the  country  had  been  prosperous  during  war, 
and  that  the  return  of  peace  had  ruined  it,  unless 
taxes  could  be  devised  which  should  press  as  hard 
as  the  war  had  done.  The  taxes  had  not  indeed 
been  made  so  heavy  as  that,  and  so  more  were 
needed.  Currency  theorists  also  arose  to  antici- 
pate all  the  wisdom  of  later  days.  They  proved 
that  the  people  of  the  United  States,  with  a  great 
continent  at  their  disposal,  could  not  get  out  of 
the  continent  an  abundance  of  food,  clothing, 
shelter  and  fuel  because  they  had  not  enough  bits 
of  paper  stamped  "  one  dollar "  at  their  disposal. 
The  currency  whims,  however,  hardly  got  into 
politics  at  that  period. 

In  1820  a  strong  attempt  was  made  to  increase 
the  tariff,  to  do  away  with  credit  for  duties,  and  to 
put  a  check  on  sales  at  auction.  As  the  presi- 
dential election  was  uncontested,  power  to  carry 
these  bills  could  not  be  concentrated.  In  1824  the 
case  was  different.  No  faction  dared  vote  against 
the  higher  tariff  for  fear  of  losing  support.1  The 
1  24  Niles,  324. 


WIRE-PULLING  95 

tariff  was  not,  therefore,  a  party  question.  The 
act  was  passed  May  22,  1824,  by  a  combination  of 
Middle  and  Western  States  against  New  England, 
and  on  a  combination  of  the  iron,  wool,  hemp, 
whiskey,  and  sugar  interests.  New  England,  as 
the  commercial  district,  was  then  for  free  trade. 

Jackson  had  been  elected  to  the  Senate  in  the 
winter  of  1823-24.  Parton  brings  the  invaluable 
testimony  of  William  B.  Lewis  as  to  the  reason 
why  and  the  way  in  which  Jackson  was  elected.1 
John  Williams  had  been  senator.  His  term  ex- 
pired. He  was  an  opponent  of  Jackson.  He  was 
a  candidate  for  reelection,  and  was  so  strong  that 
no  Jackson  man  but  Jackson  himself  could  defeat 
him.  Hence  the  men  who  were  planning  to  make 
Jackson  President,  of  whom  Lewis  was  the  chief, 
secured  Jackson's  election  to  the  Senate.  While 
the  tariff  question  was  pending,  a  convenient  per- 
son —  Dr.  Coleman,  of  Warrenton,  Va.  —  was 
found  to  interrogate  Jackson  about  it.  His  letter 
in  reply  was  the  first  of  the  adroit  letters  or  mani- 
festoes by  means  of  which  the  Jackson  managers 
carried  on  the  campaign  in  Jackson's  favor.  They 
developed  this  art  of  electioneering  in  a  way  then 
not  conceived  of  by  other  factions.  The  letter  to 
Coleman  was  a  model  letter  of  its  kind.  It  said 
nothing  clear  or  to  the  point  on  the  matter  in  ques- 
tion. It  used  some  ambiguous  phrases  which  the 
reader  could  interpret  to  suit  his  own  taste.  It 
muddled  the  question  by  contradictory  suggestions, 

i  3  Parton,  21. 


OF   THE 

UNIVERSITY 


96  ANDREW  JACKSON 

bearing  upon  it  from  a  greater  or  less  distance, 
and  from  all  points  of  view,  and  it  failed  not  to 
introduce  enough  glittering  platitudes  to  make  the 
whole  pass  current.  Jackson  voted  for  the  tariff. 
He  wrote  to  Lewis,  May  7,  1824:  — 

"  The  articles  of  National  Defence  &  National  Inde- 
pendence, I  will  with  my  vote,  foster  &  protect,  without 
counting  on  cents  &  dollars;  so  that  our  own  manu- 
facturers shall  stand  on  a  footing  of  fair  competition  with 
the  labourers  of  Europe.  In  doing  this,  the  articles  all 
being  of  the  product  of  our  own  country,  tends  to  pro- 
mote the  agriculturists,  whilst  it  gives  security  to  our 
nation  &  promotes  Domestic  Labour.  The  balance  of 
the  bill  I  look  to  with  an  eye  to  Revenue  alone,  to  meet 
the  national  debt.  These  articles  of  National  defence, 
are  Hemp,  iron,  lead,  &  coarse  woollen,  and  from  the 
experience  of  last  war  every  patriot  will  justify  me  in 
this  course  —  &  if  they  do  not,  my  own  conscience  ap- 
proves, &  I  will  follow  it  regardless  of  any  conse- 
quences." * 

He  also  voted  for  a  number  of  internal  improve- 
ment schemes.  These  votes  were  afterwards  quoted 
against  him.2 

Jackson  was  therefore  fairly  started  as  a  candi- 
date for  the  presidency.  Among  all  the  remarka- 
ble accidents  which  opened  his  way  to  the  first 
position  in  the  country,  it  was  not  the  least  that  he 
had  William  B.  Lewis  for  a  neighbor  and  friend. 
Lewis  was  the  great  father  of  the  wire-pullers. 
He  first  practised  in  a  masterly  and  scientific  way 
1  Ford  MSS.  2  38  Niles,  285. 


WIRE-PULLING  97 

the  art  of  starting  movements,  apparently  spon- 
taneous, at  a  distance,  and  in  a  quarter  from  which 
they  win  prestige  or  popularity,  in  order  that  these 
movements  may  produce,  at  the  proper  time  and 
place,  the  effects  intended  by  the  true  agent,  who, 
in  the  mean  time,  prepares  to  be  acted  on  by  the 
movement  in  the  direction  in  which,  from  the  be- 
ginning, he  desired  to  go.  On  this  system  political 
activity  is  rendered  theatrical.  The  personal  in- 
itiative is  concealed.  There  is  an  adjustment  of 
roles,  a  mise  en  scene,  and  a  constant  consideration 
of  effect.  Each  person  acts  on  the  other  in  pre- 
arranged ways.  Cues  are  given  and  taken,  and  the 
effect  depends  on  the  fidelity  of  each  to  his  part. 
The  perfection  of  the  representation  is  reached 
when  the  audience  or  spectators  are  disregarded 
until  the  finale,  when  the  chief  actor,  having  reached 
the  denoument  towards  which  he  and  his  comrades 
have  so  long  been  laboring,  comes  to  the  footlights 
and  bows  to  the  "will  of  the  people."  Lewis 
showed  great  astuteness  in  his  manoeuvres.  There 
was  nothing  vulgar  about  him.  There  was  a  cer- 
tain breadth  of  generalship  about  his  proceedings. 
He  was  very  farsighted  and  prudent.  He  had  the 
great  knowledge  required  by  the  wire-puller, — 
knowledge  of  men,  good  judgment  of  the  influ- 
ences which  would  be  potent,  if  brought  to  bear  on 
each  man  or  group.  He  knew  the  class  amongst 
whom  Jackson's  popularity  was  strongest.  He 
knew  their  notions,  prejudices,  tastes,  and  instincts. 
He  knew  what  motives  to  appeal  to.  He  wrote 


98  t  ANDREW  JACKSON 

very  well.  When  he  wanted  to  go  straight  to  a 
point  he  could  do  so.  When  he  wanted  to  pro- 
duce effects  or  suggest  adroitly,  without  coming  to 
the  point,  he  could  do  that  too.  He  also  knew 
Jackson  well.  He  no  doubt  sincerely  loved  and 
admired  Jackson.  He  threw  his  whole  soul  into 
the  undertaking  to  elect  Jackson,  but  he  never 
showed  very  markedly  selfish  or  interested  pur- 
poses in  that  connection.  So  long  as  Jackson  was 
uninformed  or  unprejudiced  on  any  matter,  he  was 
at  the  disposition  of  any  one  who  had  won  his  con- 
fidence, and  who  desired  to  influence  him  on  that 
matter.  He  could  then  be  led  to  accept  any  view 
of  it  which  was  put  before  him  in  a  way  to  strike 
his  mind.  Lewis  knew  how  to  put  a  thing  be- 
fore Jackson's  mind.  However,  when  Jackson  had 
adopted  any  view  or  notion,  his  mind  became  set 
or  biassed,  and  it  was  not  easy,  even  for  those  who 
first  influenced  him,  to  deflect  his  mind  from  rigid- 
ity of  inference,  or  his  conduct  from  direct  de- 
duction. He  often  outstripped  the  wishes  and 
intentions  of  those  who  had  moved  him  first.  To 
contradict  him,  at  that  stage,  would  have  been  to 
break  friendship.  Lewis  treated  him  with  great 
tact,  and  influenced  him  very  often,  but  he  did 
not  control  him  or  manage  him.  It  would  have 
been  a  good  thing  for  the  country  if  no  worse 
man  than  Lewis  had  ever  gained  influence  over 
Jackson. 

No  doubt  many  people  saw,  as  early  as  1815, 
Jackson's  availability  as  a  presidential  candidate. 


PROJECT  TO   NOMINATE  JACKSON          99 

Aaron  Burr  wrote  to  his  son-in-law,  Alston,  Nov. 
20,  1815,1  urging  that  Jackson  should  be  brought 
forward  as  a  candidate  by  whose  might  the  caucus 
could  be  overthrown.  Jackson  wrote  to  Lewis,  in 
1844,  about  "  the  book  lately  publeshed  "  "  called 
the  history  of  the  last  congress,"  "which  under- 
takes to  state  the  manner  of  my  being  brought  out 
for  the  Presedency,  and  which  says  it  originated 
with  "  "  Col  Burr  &  the  militant  Federalists."  " 
I  have  to  state  that  it  is  a  base  falsehood,  that  I 
ever  received  a  letter  from  Col  Burr  on  that  sub- 
ject, —  or  that  I  ever  received  a  request  from  any 
Federalist  to  become  a  candidate  for  the  Presi- 
dency —  That  I  received  many  from  such  repub- 
licans as  Edward  Livingston,  as  early  as  1816  & 
17  —  to  permit  my  name  to  be  brought  out  for  the 
Presedency  is  certainly  true,  but  which  I  answered 
promptly  I  could  not  yield  to  their  solicitation  —  "  2 
Adams  recognized  Jackson's  strength,  as  a  candi- 
date, in  1818 :  "  There  is  a  considerable  party  dis- 
posed to  bring  forward  Jackson  as  a  candidate,  and 
the  services  of  his  late  campaign  would  have  given 
him  great  strength,  if  he  had  not  counteracted  his 
own  interest  by  several  of  his  actions  in  it,"3 
having  alienated  Georgia,  Kentucky,  Virginia,  all 
State  rights  men  and  Governors  of  States. 

Parton  obtained  from  Lewis  a  description  of  the 

first   steps  towards  Jackson's  nomination.     Lewis 

tells  how  he  used  Jackson's  letters  to  Monroe  to 

win  influential  federalists  to  Jackson's  support.     It 

1  Mayo,  171.  2  Ford  MSS.  8  4  Adams,  198. 


100  ANDREW  JACKSON 

was  after  Jackson's  return  from  Florida,  in  1821, 
that  the  project  was  definitely  decided  upon.  At 
first  Jackson  rejected,  with  some  temper,  the  sug- 
gestion that  he  could  or  would  run  for  President. 
He  did  not  consider  himself  the  right  sort  of  man, 
and  he  felt  old  and  ill.  In  the  spring  of  1822 
Lewis  went  to  North  Carolina,  and  worked  up  his 
connections  there  for  Jackson.  On  the  20th  of 
July,  1822,  the  Tennessee  Legislature  made  the 
formal  nomination.  During  the  next  two  years 
Jackson's  supporters  were  gaining  connections  and 
undermining  the  caucus,  for  he  was  an  independent 
candidate  and  a  "  disorganize^"  because  he  was 
raised  up  outside  of  the  machine,  and  without  any 
consultation  with  the  established  party  authorities. 
Certain  features  of  Jackson's  character  have 
appeared  already.  We  have  seen  some  of  his  ele- 
ments of  strength  and  some  of  his  faults.  The 
nation  wanted  to  reward  him  for  military  achieve- 
ments and  for  a  display  of  military  virtues.  They 
had  discarded  dukedoms,  pensions,  ribbons,  and 
orders,  and  they  had  no  sign  of  national  gratitude 
to  employ  but  election  to  civil  office.  So  far  Jack- 
son had  not  made  public  display  of  any  qualities 
but  those  of  a  military  man,  and  violence,  indis- 
cretion, obstinacy,  and  quarrelsomeness.  In  the 
campaign,  those  who  opposed  him  called  him  a 
"  murderer."  The  only  incidents  of  his  life  which 
the  biographer  can  note,  aside  from  his  military 
service,  are  successive  acts  of  impropriety  and  bad 
judgment.  Senator  Mills  wrote  of  him  that  "  he 


PROJECT  TO  NOMINATE  JACKSON        101 

was  considered  extremely  rash  and  inconsiderate ; 
tyrannical  and  despotic  in  his  principles.  A  per- 
sonal acquaintance  with  him  has  convinced  many 
who  had  these  opinions  that  they  were  unfounded. 
He  is  very  mild  and  amiable  in  his  disposition, 
of  great  benevolence,  and  his  manners,  although 
formed  in  the  wilds  of  the  West,  exceedingly  pol- 
ished and  polite.  Everybody  that  knows  him, 
loves  him,  and  he  is  exactly  the  man  with  whom 
you  [his  wife]  would  be  delighted.  .  .  .  He  has 
all  the  ardor  and  enthusiasm  of  youth  and  is  as 
free  from  guile  as  an  infant.  ...  A  personal  ac- 
quaintance with  him  has  dissipated  all  my  preju- 
dices. .  .  .  But  with  all  Gen.  Jackson's  good  and 
great  qualities,  I  should  be  sorry  to  see  him  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States.  His  early  education 
was  very  deficient,  and  his  modes  of  thinking  and 
habits  of  life  partake  too  much  of  war  and  military 
glory."  1  Negatively,  however,  there  was  more  to 
be  said  for  Jackson.  He  was  above  every  species 
of  money  vice  ;  he  was  chaste  and  domestic  in  his 
habits ; 2  he  was  temperate  in  every  way  ;  he  was 
not  ambitious  in  the  bad  sense.  Judge  McNairy 
"  speaks  of  Gen.  Jackson  as  being  less  addicted  to 
the  vices  and  immoralities  of  youth,  than  any 
young  man  with  whom  he  was  acquainted ;  that  he 

1  Milk's  Letters,  31. 

2  The  only  contrary  suggestion  known  is  in  Binns,  245.     "  This 
rough  soldier,  exposed  all   his  life  to  those  temptations  which 
have  conquered  public  men  whom  we  still  call  good,  could  kiss 
little  children  with  lips  as  pure  as  their  own."    Quincy  ;  Figures, 
367. 


102  ANDREW  JACKSON 

never  knew  of  his  fighting  cocks,  or  gambling, 
and,  as  for  his  being  a  libertine,  as  has  been 
charged,  the  Judge  says  he  was  distinctly  the  re- 
verse of  it.  The  truth  is,  as  everybody  here  well 
knows,  Gen.  Jackson  never  was  fond  of  any  kind 
of  sport,  nor  did  he  indulge  in  any  except  occa- 
sionally for  amusement,  but  Horse-racing.  This 
his  friends  are  willing  to  admit,  but  even  this  he 
has  quit  for  many  years.  I  believe  ever  since  the 
year  1810  or  1811."  * 

There  were  already  four  other  candidates  in  the 
field,  who  all  belonged  to  the  democratic-republican 
party.  Niles  gives  an  instance  in  which  seven 
democrats  met  at  Philadelphia,  who  all  were  for 
Schulze,  the  democratic  candidate  for  Governor. 
Each  candidate  for  President  had  a  supporter 
among  them,  and  no  candidate  had  over  two.2  De 
Witt  Clinton  was  not  altogether  out  of  considera- 
tion. A  caucus  of  the  South  Carolina  Legislature 
nominated  Lowndes.3 

John  Quincy  Adams  stood  first  among  the  can- 
didates by  his  public  services  and  experience.  He 
was  fifty-seven  years  old.  He  went  to  Europe  with 
his  father  when  he  was  eleven  years  old,  and  stud- 
ied there  for  several  years.  He  was,  through  his 
father,  intimate  from  his  earliest  youth  with  public 
and  diplomatic  affairs.  As  far  as  education  and 
early  training  could  go,  he  had  the  best  outfit  for 

1  Lewis  to  Haywood  (1827) ;  copy  in  Ford  MSS. 

2  24  Niles,  369. 
8  5  Adams,  468. 


JOHN  QUINCY  ADAMS  103 

a  statesman  and  diplomat.  He  enjoyed  great  re- 
spect. Those  who  thought  that  a  man  ought  to 
advance  to  the  presidency  through  lower  grades  of 
public  employment  looked  upon  him  as  the  most 
suitable  candidate.  He  was  not  a  man  of  genius, 
but  one  of  wide  interests,  methodical  habits,  and 
indefatigable  industry.  It  is  hard  to  see  what  he 
ever  did,  from  his  earliest  youth,  for  amusement 
and  entertainment.  He  would  have  been  a  better 
statesman  if  he  had  been  more  frivolous.  He  was 
unsocial  in  his  manners,  had  few  friends,  and  re- 
pelled those  who  would  have  been  his  friends.  So 
far  as  we  can  learn,  he  engaged  in  no  intrigues 
for  the  presidency.  He  certainly  had  the  smallest 
and  least  zealous  corps  of  workers.  His  weakness 
was  that  the  great  body  of  the  voters  did  not  have 
any  feeling  that  a  man  with  the  qualifications  which 
he  possessed  was  needed  for  the  presidential  office. 
He  had  been  a  democrat  since  1807,  when  he  went 
over  to  the  administration  party  because  he  believed 
that  the  New  England  federalists  were  plotting 
secession.  His  soundness  in  "democratic  princi- 
ples "  was  doubted.  He  was  earnestly  disliked  by 
all  the  active  politicians.  In  the  campaign  he  was 
called  a  "tory."  He  was  charged  with  offering, 
at  Ghent,  to  yield  to  the  English  the  right  of 
navigating  the  Mississippi,  if  they  would  renew 
the  rights  to  fish  in  Canadian  waters ;  that  is,  with 
offering  to  sacrifice  a  western  interest  to  serve  an 
eastern  one.  He  published  a  small  volume  to  ex- 
pose the  untruth  of  this  charge  and  the  character 


104  ANDREW  JACKSON 

of  the  evidence  by  which  it  was  supported.1  In 
his  own  opinion,  this  attack  helped  him.2  He  was 
in  favor  of  the  tariff  as  it  stood  in  1824.  He 
thought  that  it  gave  enough  protection.  He  was 
also  in  favor  of  internal  improvements,  but  thought 
that  they  might  be  abused.3  He  was  accused  of 
undemocratic  care  for  etiquette,  and  also  of  sloven- 
liness in  dress.  Mrs.  Adams  gave  a  ball  in  honor 
of  Jackson,  January  8, 1824.  "  It  is  the  universal 
opinion  that  nothing  has  ever  equalled  this  party 
here,  either  in  brilliancy  of  preparation  or  elegance 
of  the  company."  4 

Calhoun  enjoyed  great  popularity  in  New  Eng- 
land, in  New  York  city,  and  in  Pennsylvania,  as 
well  as  at  home.  He  was  forty-two  years  old, 
and  was  the  "young  men's  candidate."  He  had 
actively  favored  the  tariff  of  1816  and  the  Bank, 
and  also  plans  for  internal  improvements.  In 
October,  1822,  Adams  wrote :  "  Calhoun  has  no 
petty  scruples  about  constructive  powers  and  State 
rights."  5  "  He  is  ardent,  persevering,  industrious, 
and  temperate,  of  great  activity  and  quickness  of 
perception  and  rapidity  of  utterance ;  as  a  poli- 
tician, too  theorizing,  speculative  and  metaphysical, 
—  magnificent  in  his  views  of  the  powers  and 
capacities  of  the  government  and  of  the  virtue, 
intelligence,  and  wisdom  of  the  people.  He  is 
in  favor  of  elevating,  cherishing,  and  increasing 

1  The  Duplicate  Letters,  the  Fisheries  and  the  Mississippi. 

2  6  Adams,  263.  8  6  Adams,  353,  451. 
4  Mills's  Letters,  30.                       6  6  Adams,  75. 


JOHN  CALDWELL  CALHOUN  105 

all  the  institutions  of  the  government,  and  of  a 
vigorous  and  energetic  administration  of  it.  From 
his  rapidity  of  thought,  he  is  often  wrong  in 
his  conclusions,  and  his  theories  are  sometimes 
wild,  extravagant,  and  impractical.  He  has  always 
claimed  to  be,  and  is,  of  the  democratic  party,  but 
of  a  very  different  class  from  that  of  Crawford ; 
more  like  Adams,  and  his  schemes  are  sometimes 
denounced  by  his  party  as  ultra-fanatical.  His 
private  character  is  estimable  and  exemplary,  and 
his  devotion  to  his  official  duties  is  regular  and 
severe,  but  he  is  formidably  opposed  on  the  ground 
of  his  youth,  his  inexperience,  his  heterodoxy  in 
politics,  and  his  ambition."  l  Calhoun  and  Adams 
had  been  strong  friends,  and  there  was  some  idea 
of  putting  Calhoun  on  the  ticket  with  Adams  until 
1822,  when  some  members  of  Congress  nominated 
Calhoun  for  President.2  Webster  preferred  Cal- 
houn to  all  the  other  candidates.3  His  brother 
wrote  that  Calhoun  was  the  second  choice  of  New 
Hampshire.4  Calhoun  took  the  War  Department 
in  1817,  when  it  was  in  great  disorder.  He  had 
to  bear  a  great  deal  of  abuse  before  he  got  it  in 
order,  but  later  he  was  much  praised  for  the  system 
he  had  introduced.5  He  and  Crawford  were  espe- 
cial rivals,  because  Crawford  was  the  "regular" 

1  Mills's  Letters,  28. 

2  6  Adams,  42. 

8  1  Curtis's  Webster,  218,  236. 

4  1  Webster's  Correspondence,  323. 

5  26  Niles,-50.     Adams  thought  this  praise  undeserved.     7 
Adams,  446. 


106  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Virginia  and  Southern  candidate.  In  1822  at- 
tempts were  made  to  injure  Calhoun  by  an  investi- 
gation of  a  contract  for  building  the  Rip  Raps  at 
Old  Point  Comfort.  The  contract  was  private, 
not  competitive.  He  was  exonerated  by  a  com- 
mittee of  the  House.1  As  we  shall  see,  Calhoun 
withdrew  his  name  before  the  election. 

Crawford  was  the  regular  candidate.  He  was 
fifty-two  years  old.  In  1798  he  had  been  an  "  Ad- 
dresser," that  is,  an  orthodox  federalist.2  He  had 
also  been  a  supporter  of  the  old  Bank,  and  had 
been  the  leader  in  the  Senate  for  the  renewal  of 
its  charter.  He  had  also  opposed  the  embargo.3 
He  had  been  very  eagerly  working  for  eight  years 
to  reach  the  presidency.  In  the  campaign  he  was 
called  an  "  intriguer."  As  Secretary  of  the  Trea- 
sury, during  the  crisis  of  1819,  he  had  a  very  diffi- 
cult task  to  perform.  He  had  undertaken  even 
more  than  his  duty  required,  for  he  had  aimed 
to  "do  justice"  between  the  banks,  and  to  keep 
them  from  encroaching  upon  each  other.  To  this 
end  he  distributed  his  deposits,  and  in  some  cases 
favored  certain  banks.  When  the  crash  came 
his  funds  were  locked  up  in  some  of  these  banks. 
He  was  then  open  to  the  charge,  which  Ninian  Ed- 
wards made  over  the  signature  "A.  B.,"  that  he 
had  used  the  treasury  funds  to  win  political  capital, 
and  had  corruptly  put  the  funds  in  unsound  banks. 
Crawford  was  exonerated  by  a  committee  of  the 

i  22  Niles,  251.  2  24  Niles,  132. 

s  Cobb,  14G.        , 


WILLIAM  HARRIS  CRAWFORD  107 

House,  but  he  barely  escaped  ruin.1  "He  is  a 
hardy,  bold,  resolute  man,  with  the  appearance  of 
great  frankness  and  openness  of  character,  unpol- 
ished and  somewhat  rude  in  his  manners,  and  very 
far  inferior  to  Mr.  Adams  in  learning  and  attain- 
ments. He  has,  however,  a  strong,  vigorous  mind, 
and  has  made  himself  what  he  is  by  his  own  active 
efforts.  .  .  .  He  is  now  at  the  head  of  those  who 
are  here  termed  radicals "  [extreme  State  rights 
men].2  He  introduced  the  limited  period  of  ser- 
vice, by  the  Act  of  May  15, 1820,  into  the  Treasury 
Department.  This  act  limits  the  period  of  office 
of  all  persons  engaged  in  collecting  the  revenue  to 
four  years,  at  the  expiration  of  which  time  they  go 
out  of  office  or  come  up  for  reappointment.3  It  is 
one  of  the  most  important  steps  in  the  history  of 
the  abuse  of  the  civil  service.  Crawford  was  be- 
lieved by  his  colleagues  to  have  sacrificed  the  ad- 
ministration to  make  capital  for  himself.  Adams 
says  that  Crawford  and  Monroe  quarrelled  to  the 
verge  of  violence  during  the  last  months  of  the 
administration.4  In  order  to  win  strength  for 
Crawford,  Van  Buren  was  nominated  for  Vice- 
President  by  the  Legislature  of  Georgia.  This 
proposition  was  overwhelmed  by  ridicule.5  Craw- 

1  Folio  State  Papers  ;  5  Finance.     Edwards  said  that  he  made 
the  charge  under  promises  of  support  from  Monroe,  Jackson,  Cal- 
houn,  and  Adams.    Ford's  Illinois,  63. 

2  Mills's  Letters,  28. 
8  7  Adams,  424. 

4  7  Adams,  81. 
*  Cobb,  209. 


108  ANDREW  JACKSON 

ford  was  physically  disabled  from  September,  1823, 
to  September,  1824.  He  could  not  sign  his  name, 
and  was  apparently  a  wreck.  He  used  a  f  ac-simile 
stamp  on  public  papers,  or  it  was  used  by  a  mem- 
ber of  his  family  under  his  direction. 

"  Adams,  Jackson,  and  Calhoun,  all  think  well  of 
each  other,  and  are  united  at  least  in  one  thing,  to 
wit,  a  most  thorough  dread  and  abhorrence  of  Craw- 
ford. Mr.  Clay  stands  by  himself,  and,  with  many 
excellent  qualities,  would  be  more  dangerous  at  the 
head  of  the  government  than  either  of  the  others. 
Ardent,  bold,  and  adventurous  in  all  his  theories,  he 
would  be,  as  is  feared,  rash  in  enterprise,  and  in- 
considerate and  regardless  of  consequences.  His 
early  education  was  exceedingly  defective,  and  his 
morals  have  been  not  the  most  pure  and  correct."  l 
Clay  had  already  assumed  the  championship  of 
the  protective  system.  He  had  been  one  of  the 
strongest  opponents  of  the  re-charter  of  the  first 
Bank.  He  had  also  made  "  sympathy  with  nations 
struggling  for  liberty  "  one  of  his  points,  and  had 
been  zealous  for  the  recognition  of  the  South  Amer- 
ican republics.  He  was  a  great  party  leader.  He 
had  just  the  power  to  win  men  to  him  and  to  in- 
spire personal  loyalty,  which  Adams  had  not.  On 
the  other  hand,  he  lacked  industry.  He  was  elo- 
quent, but  he  never  mastered  any  subject  which 
required  study.  His  strength  lay  in  facility  and 
practical  tact.  He  was  forty-seven  years  old.  He 
was  stigmatized  as  a  "gambler "-by  his  opponents 

i  Mills's  Letters,  32. 


CAUCUS  OF  1824  109 

in  the  campaign.  From  1820  to  1823  he  was  not 
in  public  life,  but  was  retrieving  his  private  for- 
tunes. His  enemies  said  that  his  affairs  had  been 
embarrassed  by  gambling.  He  was  Speaker  from 
1815  to  1820,  and  again  from  1823  to  1825.  He 
was  one  of  the  commissioners  who  made  the  treaty 
of  Ghent. 

The  Crawford  men  wanted  a  congressional  caucus 
in  1824,  because  they  had  control  of  the  machine. 
The  supporters  of  the  other  candidates  opposed  any 
caucus,  but  secretly,  because  the  caucus  was  now 
an  established  institution.  The  opponents  of  the 
caucus  found  a  strong  ally  in  Niles,  who  opened 
fire  on  the  caucus  in  his  "  Register  "  without  any 
reserve.  His  sincerity  and  singleness  of  purpose 
are  beyond  question.  He  did  not  use  his  paper  to 
support  any  candidate.  He  was  an  old  Jeffersonian 
republican  of  1798,  and  he  believed  sincerely  in 
all  the  "principles."  He  assailed  the  caucus,  be- 
cause in  his  view  it  usurped  the  right  of  the  people 
to  govern  themselves.  He  denounced  it  steadily 
for  more  than  a  year;  and  he  succeeded  in  casting 
odium  upon  it.  The  Legislatures  of  New  York  and 
Virginia  passed  resolutions  in  favor  of  a  caucus, 
because  these  two  States,  while  united,  could  con- 
trol the  presidency  through  the  caucus.  New  York 
being  rent  by  democratic  faction  fights,  and  Vir- 
ginia being  led  by  a  close  oligarchy,  New  York 
became  an  appendage  to  Virginia  in  their  coalition. 
Tennessee,  South  Carolina,  Alabama  and  Mary- 
land adopted  resolutions  against  the  caucus.  The 


110  ANDREW  JACKSON 

legislature  of  Pennsylvania  declared  against  a 
"  partial  caucus."  1 

The  caucus  met  in  the  chamber  of  the  House 
of  ^Representatives  February  14,  1824.2  Of  216 
democrats  in  Congress,  66  were  present.  Two, 
who  were  ill  at  home,  sent  proxies.  If  proxies 
were  allowable,  the  members  of  Congress,  when 
assembled  in  presidential  caucus,  must  have  been 
regarded  as  independent  powers,  possessed  of  a 
prerogative,  like  peers  or  sovereigns.  The  vote 
was :  Crawford,  64  ;  Adams,  2  ;  Jackson,  1 ;  Macon, 
1 :  i.  e.,  all  but  the  Crawford  men  stayed  away. 
Gallatin  was  nominated  for  Vice-President  by  57 
votes.  An  address  was  published,  defending  the 
caucus,  and  arguing  its  indispensability  to  the 
party.3  Some  question  was  raised  about  Gallatin's 
eligibility  on  account  of  his  foreign  birth,  but  he 
possessed  the  alternative  qualification  allowed  by 
the  Constitution.  He  had  been  a  commissioner  at 
Ghent  and  a  friend  of  Crawford.  His  nomination 
did  not  strengthen  the  ticket.  There  was  still  a 
great  deal  of  rancor  against  him  for  forsaking  the 
Treasury  Department  when  the  war  of  1812  broke 
out.4  He  soon  withdrew  his  name  because  the 
ci  ,ucus  was  so  unpopular. 

Martin  Van  Buren  was  chief  engineer  of  the  last 
congressional  caucus.  He  was  senator  from  New 

-  f>  Adams,  232. 
2  25  Niles,  388. 
»  25  Niles,  391. 
4  See  a  strong  expression  of  it  as  late  as  1832  in  42  Niles,  435. 


INTRIGUES  IN  NEW  YORK  111 

York.  He  and  his  friends,  under  the  new  Consti- 
tution of  1821,  had  established  a  very  efficient 
party  organization,  which  they  had  well  in  hand. 
They  were  known  as  the  Regency,  and  they  had 
renewed  the  alliance  with  Virginia  to  control  the 
machine  and  elect  Crawford.  A  project  which 
threatened  to  mar  their  scheme  was  the  proposi- 
tion, in  1823,  to  take  the  election  of  presidential 
electors  from  the  Legislature  of  New  York  and  give 
it  to  the  people.  The  Regency-Tammany  party 
opposed  this,  as  it  would  render  useless  all  their 
machinery.  The  advocates  of  the  change,  who  were 
the  opponents  of  Crawford,  Tammany,  and  the 
Regency,  formed  the  "people's  party."  Clinton 
was  for  Jackson,  so  he  was  allied  with  the  people's 
party  against  Crawford.  Although  Clinton  was 
the  soul  of  the  canal  enterprise,  he  was  removed 
from  his  office  of  canal  commissioner  to  try  to 
break  up  this  combination.  It  would  never  do  for 
the  Regency  to  oppose  directly  and  openly  a  pro- 
position to  give  the  election  to  the  people.  When 
the  law  was  proposed,  the  Regency  managed  to 
twist  it  into  such  preposterous  shape  that  a  general 
ticket  was  to  be  voted  for,  and  if  there  should  not 
be  a  majority  (which,  with  four  in  the  field,  was  a 
very  probable  result)  the  State  would  lose  its  vote. 
The  bill  passed  the  House,  but  was  defeated  in  the 
Senate.1  The  popular  indignation  was  so  great 
that  the  next  Legislature  was  carried  by  the  peo- 
ple's party,  and  a  joint  ticket  of  electors  was 

1  2  Hammond,  132. 


112  ANDREW  JACKSON 

elected,  on  which  were  25  Adams  men,  7  Clay  men, 
and  4  Crawford  men.1  Some  of  them  must  have 
changed  their  votes  before  the  election. 

A  federalist  convention  at  Harrisburg,  Pennsyl- 
vania, February  22,  1824,  nominated  Jackson.2 
At  a  primary  meeting  at  Philadelphia,  Dallas 
withdrew  Calhoun's  name  from  the  first  place 
and  nominated  him  for  the  second.  Calhoun  was 
strong  in  Pennsylvania,  but  Jackson  had  super- 
seded him.  This  move  was  a  coalition  of  Jack- 
son and  Calhoun.  Jackson  wrote  to  Lewis,  from 
Washington,  March  31,  1824  :  — 

"On  the  subject  of  Mr  Calhoune,  I  have  no  doubt 
myself,  but  his  friends  acted  agreeable  to  his  under- 
standing &  instructions  ;  &  that  he  is  sincere  in  his 
wishes  —  some  have  doubted  this,  but  I  have  not  —  and 
I  can  give  you  when  we  meet  reasons  that  will  convince 
you  I  cannot  be  mistaken  —  as  far  as  his  friends  to  the 
south  have  acted,  it  is  conformable  to  this ;  &  I  have  no 
doubt  but  both  the  Carolinas  will  unite  in  my  support  — 
You  have  seen  the  result  of  Pennsylvania  —  New  York 
is  coming  out  —  and  it  is  said  some  of  the  N jwengland 
States  ;  a  few  weeks  will  give  us  the  result  of  the  move- 
ment of  New  York — if  Crawford  is  not  supported  in 
that  State  I  have  but  little  doubt  but  he  will  be  droped, 
and  from  what  you  will  see  in  the  National  intelligences 
of  this  morning  Mr  Clay  taken  up.  I  have  no  doubt  if 
I  was  to  travel  to  Boston  where  I  have  been  invited  that 
it  would  ensure  my  election  —  But  this  I  cannot  do  — 

1  27  Niles,  186.     Hammond's  statement  is  obscure.     See  1 
Hammond,  177. 

2  1  Sargent,  41. 


PARTY  READJUSTMENTS  113 

I  would  feel  degraded  the  ballance  of  ray  life  —  If  I 
ever  fill  that  office  it  must  be  the  free  choice  of  the 
people —  I  can  then  say  I  am  the  President  of  the 
nation  —  and  my  acts  shall  comport  with  that  char- 
acter." l 

The  understanding  was  that  Jackson  would  take 
only  one  term,  and  that  his  friends  would  then 
secure  the  succession  to  Calhoun. 

The  democratic  convention  at  Harrisburg,  March 
4th,  was  stampeded  for  Jackson.  Only  one  vote  was 
given  against  him.2  Another  democratic  conven- 
tion, called  "  regular,"  was  convened  August  9th. 
It  repudiated  Jackson  and  adhered  to  Crawford.3 
Jackson  and  his  followers  were  denounced  as  "  dis- 
organizers."  The  Albany  "  Argus  "  said  of  Jack- 
son, "  It  is  idle  in  this  State,  however  it  may  be  in 
others,  to  strive  even  for  a  moderate  support  of 
Mr.  Jackson.  He  is  wholly  out  of  the  question  as 
far  as  the  votes  of  New  York  are  in  it.  Independ- 
ently of  the  disclosures  of  his  political  opinions,  he 
could  not  be  the  republican  candidate.  He  is  re- 
spected as  a  gallant  soldier,  but  he  stands,  in  the 
minds  of  the  people  of  this  State,  at  an  immeasur- 
able distance  from  the  executive  chair."4  The 
44  Argus  "  swallowed  its  words  a  little  later,  without 
a  sign  of  indigestion.  It  knew  that,  when  the  dem- 
ocratic Leviathan  takes  a  self-willed  freak,  he  is 
the  wisest  leader  who  follows  most  humbly.  After 
it  had  reversed  itself,  any  one  who  held  the  very 

1  Ford  MSS.  2  26  NUes,  20. 

8  1  Sargent,  42.  *  Quoted  49  Niles,  188. 


114  ANDREW  JACKSON 

judicious  opinion  embodied  in  this  paragraph  was 
denounced  by  it  as  a  "federalist,"  which  was  as 
much  as  to  say,  an  enemy  of  the  American  people. 
Niles  says  that  Calhoun  opposed  Jackson  in  a  pub- 
lic speech,  in  1822,  because  he  was  the  candidate 
of  the  Bank  of  the  United  States,  and  his  election 
would  unite  "  the  purse  and  the  sword."  1  Jeffer- 
son said :  "  I  feel  very  much  alarmed  at  the  pro- 
spect of  seeing  General  Jackson  President.  He  is 
one  of  the  most  unfit  men  I  know  of  for  the  place. 
He  has  had  very  little  respect  for  laws  or  constitu- 
tions, and  is,  in  fact,  an  able  military  chief.  His 
passions  are  terrible.  .  .  .  He  has  been  much  tried 
since  I  knew  him,  but  he  is  a  dangerous  man."  2 
On  the  contrary,  Jackson's  courtly  bearing  won 
for  him  all  the  ladies.  Webster  wrote :  "  General 
Jackson's  manners  are  more  presidential  than  those 
of  any  of  the  candidates.  He  is  grave,  mild,  and 
reserved.  My  wife  is  for  him  decidedly."  3  Jack- 
son's friends  induced  him  to  have  a  kind  of  recon- 
ciliation with  Scott,  Clay,  and  Benton.  The  last 
was  a  supporter  of  Clay,  but  when  Clay  was  out  of 
the  contest  he  turned  to  Jackson.4  Adams  says 
that  Benton  joined  Jackson  after  Jackson's  friends 
obtained  for  him  the  nomination  as  minister  to 
Mexico.  When  Adams  came  in  he  would  not 

1  22  Niles,  73. 

2  1  Webster's  Correspondence,  371. 

8  1  Webster's  Correspondence,  346.    See,  also,  Quincy,  Figures^ 
883. 
4  He  went  first  to  Crawford,  then  to  Jackson.     Cobb,  215. 


VOTE  OF  1824  115 

ratify  the  appointment.1  During  the  winter  some 
sort  of  a  peace  was  made  between  Jackson  and 
Crawford.2 

The  result  of  the  electoral  vote  was:  Jackson, 
99;  Adams,  84;  Crawford,  41;  Clay,  37.  For 
Vice-President  the  vote  was :  Calhoun,  182 ;  San- 
ford,  30;  Macon,  24;  Jackson,  13;  Van  Buren, 
9 ;  Clay,  2 ;  blank,  1.  New  York  voted :  Jackson, 
1 ;  Adams,  26  ;  Crawford,  5  ;  Clay,  4.  The  elect- 
ors were  chosen  by  the  Legislature  in  Delaware, 
Georgia,  Louisiana,  New  York,  South  Carolina, 
and  Vermont.  In  the  other  States  the  popular 
vote  stood  (in  round  numbers)  :  Jackson,  155,800  ; 
Adams,  105,300  ;  Crawford,  44,200  ;  Clay,  46,500. 
The  second  choice  of  Clay's  States  (Ohio,  Ken- 
tucky, and  Missouri)  was  Jackson.  In  Pennsyl- 
vania, Jackson  had  36,000  votes,  and  all  the  others 
together  had  less  than  12,000.  Only  about  one 
third  of  the  vote  of  the  State  was  polled,  because 
it  was  known  that  Jackson  would  carry  it  over- 
whelmingly.3 Ten  years  later  Adams  wrote  about 
the  people  of  Pennsylvania,  "  whose  fanatical  pas- 
sion for  Andrew  Jackson  can  be  compared  to 
nothing  but  that  of  Titania,  Queen  of  the  Fairies, 
for  Bottom  after  his  assification."  4 

The  intriguing  for  the  election  now  entered  on 
a  new  stage.  Clay  was  out  of  the  contest  in  the 
House,  but  he  had  great  influence  there,  and  it 
has  often  been  asserted  that  the  House  would  have 

1  6  Adams,  522.  2  6  Adams,  478,  485. 

8  27  Niles,  186.  *  9  Adams,  160. 


116  ANDREW   JACKSON 

elected  him  if  his  name  had  come  before  it  as  one 
of  the  three  highest.  He  was  courted  by  all  parties. 
It  would  be  tedious  to  collect  the  traces  of  various 
efforts  to  form  combinations.  The  truth  seems  to 
be  this :  Washington  was  filled  during  the  winter 
with  persons,  members  of  Congress  and  others,  who 
were  under  great  excitement  about  the  election. 
All  sorts  of  busybodies  were  running  about,  talk- 
ing and  planning,  and  proposing  what  seemed  to 
each  to  be  good.  Persons  who  were  in  Washing- 
ton, and  were  cognizant  of  some  one  line  of  intrigue, 
or  of  the  activity  of  some  one  person,  have  left 
records  of  what  they  saw  or  heard,  and  have  ve- 
hemently maintained  each  that  his  evidence  gives 
the  only  correct  clew  to  the  result.  Each  candi- 
date's name  is  connected  with  some  intrigue,  or 
some  proposition  for  a  coalition.  In  no  case  is  the 
proposition  or  intrigue  brought  home  to  the  prin- 
cipal party  as  a  conscious  or  responsible  partici- 
pator, and  yet  it  appears  that  the  negotiations 
were  often  of  such  a  character  that  they  could 
have  been  taken  up  and  adopted,  if  they  had 
proved  satisfactory. 

The  election  in  the  House  took  place  February 
9,  1825.  On  the  first  ballot,  Adams  obtained  the 
votes  of  thirteen  States,  Jackson  of  seven,  and 
Crawford  of  four.  For  the  first  few  days  Jack- 
son seemed  to  bear  his  defeat  good-naturedly, 
although  he  had  written  to  Lewis,  as  early  as> 
January  29 :  — 


VOTE   OF  1824  117 

"  You  will  see  from  the  public  Journals  the  stand  Mr 
Clay  has  taken  for  Mr  Adams  —  This  was  such  an  un- 
expected course,  that  self-agrandizement,  and  corruption, 
by  many  are  attached  to  his  motives  —  ... 

"  Intrigue,  corruption,  and  sale  of  public  office  is  the 
rumor  of  the  day —  How  humiliating  to  the  american 
character  that  its  high  functionaries  should  so  conduct 
themselves,  as  to  become  liable  to  the  imputation  of 
bargain  &  sale  of  the  constitutional  rights  of  the 
people."  l 

He  met  Adams  on  the  evening  of  the  election 
at  the  President's  reception,  and  bore  himself  much 
the  better  of  the  two.2 

It  was  soon  rumored  that  Clay  was  to  be  Sec- 
retary of  State.  After  a  few  days  he  accepted 
that  post.  The  charge  of  a  corrupt  bargain  be- 
tween him  and  Adams  was  then  started.  It  was 
an  inference  from  Clay's  appointment,  and  nothing 
more.  Any  man  can  judge  to-day,  as  well  as  any 
one  could  in  1824,  whether  that  fact  leads  straight 
and  necessarily  to  that  inference.  Not  a  particle 
of  other  evidence  ever  was  alleged.  We  have 
never  had  any  definition  of  the  proper  limits  of 
combinations,  bargains,  and  pledges  in  politics,  but 
an  agreement  .to  make  Clay  Secretary  of  State,  if 
made,  could  not  be  called  a  corrupt  bargain.  He 
was  such  a  man  that  he  was  a  fit  and  proper 
person  for  the  place.  No  one  would  deny  that. 
Therefore  no  public  interest  would  be  sacrificed  or 
abused  by  his  appointment.  A  corrupt  bargain 

1  Ford  MSS.  2  Cobb,  226 ;  1  Curtis's  Buchanan,  43. 


118  ANDREW  JACKSON 

must  be  one  in  which  there  is  collusion  for  private 
gain  at  the  expense  of  the  public  welfare.  Bar- 
gains which  avoid  this  definition  must  yet  be  toler- 
ated in  all  political  systems,  although  they  impair 
the  purity  of  any  system. 

The  men  around  Jackson  —  Eaton,  Lewis,  Liv- 
ingston, Lee,  Swartwout  —  knew  the  value  of  the 
charge  of  corrupt  bargain  for  electioneering  pur- 
poses, and  the  political  value  of  the  appeal  to  Jack- 
son's supporters  on  the  ground  that  he  had  been 
cheated  out  of  his  election.  Did  not  they  first 
put  the  idea  into  Jackson's  head  that  he  had  been 
cheated  by  a  corrupt  bargain  ?  Is  not  that  the  ex- 
planation of  his  change  of  tone  from  the  lofty 
urbanity  of  the  President's  assembly  to  the  rancor- 
ous animosity  of  a  few  days  afterwards  ?  Such  a 
conjecture  fits  all  the  circumstances  and  all  the 
characters.  The  men  around  Jackson  might  see 
the  value  of  the  charge,  and  use  it,  without  ever 
troubling  themselves  to  define  just  how  far  they  be- 
lieved in  it ;  but  Jackson  would  not  do  that.  Such 
a  suggestion  would  come  to  him  like  a  revelation, 
and  his  mind  would  close  on  it  with  a  solidity  of 
conviction  which  nothing  ever  could  shake.  Feb- 
ruary 20th,  he  wrote  to  Lewis  :  — 

"  But  when  we  see  the  predictions  verified  on  the  re- 
sult of  the  Presidential  election  —  when  we  behold  two 
men  —  political  enemies,  and  as  different  in  political  sen- 
timents as  any  men  can  be,  so  suddenly  unite  ;  there  must 
be  some  unseen  cause  to  produce  this  political  phenomena 
—  This  cause  is  developed  by  applying  the  rumors  be- 


CHARGE  OF  CORRUPT  BARGAIN          119 

fore  the  election,  to  the  result  of  that  election,  and  to 
the  tendering  of  and  the  acceptance  of  the  office  of  Sec. 
of  State  by  Mr  Clay.  These  are  facts  that  will  confirm 
every  unbiasased  mind,  that  there  must  have  been  &  were 
a  secret  understanding  between  Mr  Adams  &  Mr  Clay 
of  and  concerning  these  seems  of  corruptoon,  that  has 
occasioned  Mr  Clay  to  abandon  the  will,  and  wishes  of 
the  people  of  the  west,  and  to  form  the  coalition  so  ex- 
traordinary as  the  one  he  has  done. 

From  Mr  Clays  late  conduct,  my  opinion  of 
him,  long  ago  expressed,  is  best  realized  —  from  his  con- 
duct on  the  Seminole  question,  I  then  pronounced  him  a 
political  Gambler —  ...  I  have,  now,  no  doubt, 
but  I  have  had  opposed  to  me  all  the  influence  of  the 
Cabinet,  except  Calhoune  —  would  it  not  be  well  that 
the  papers  of  Nashville  &  the  whole  State  should  speak 
out,  with  moderate  but  firm  disapprobation  of  this  cor- 
ruption —  to  give  a  proper  tone  to  the  people  &  to  draw 
their  attention  to  the  subject  —  When  I  see  you  I  have 
much  to  say  —  There  is  more  corruption  than  I  antici- 
pated ;  and  as  you  know  I  thought  there  was  enough 
of  it."  1 

Benton  always  scouted  the  notion  of  the  bar- 
gain.2  He  says  that  he  knew  before  Adams  did,, 
that  Clay  intended  to  vote  for  Adams.3  Benton 
would  not  follow  Clay.  Clay  and  Jackson  had 
had  no  intercourse  since  the  Seminole  war  affair. 
The  Tennessee  delegation  patched  up  a  reconcilia- 

1  Ford  MSS. 

2  Ibid. 

8  1  Benton.  48 ;  see  his  letter  of  Dec.  27,  1827,  in  Truth's  Ad- 
vocate, 63. 


120  ANDREW  JACKSON 

tion  in  18  24.1  Clay's  reason  for  voting  for  Adams 
was  that  Crawford  was  incapacitated  by  broken 
health,2  and  that  a  military  hero  was  not  a  fit  person 
to  be  President.  January  8th  Clay  wrote  to  F.  P. 
Blair 3  that  the  friends  of  all  the  candidates  were 
courting  him,  but  that  he  should  vote  for  Adams. 
January  24th  Clay  and  the  majority  of  the  Ohio 
and  Kentucky  delegations  declared  that  they  would 
vote  for  Adams.  In  a  letter  to  F.  Brooke,  January 
28, 1825,  Clay  stated  that  he  would  vote  for  Adams 
for  the  reasons  given.4  The  Clay  men  generally 
argued  that  if  Jackson  was  elected  he  would  keep 
Adams  in  the  State  Department.  It  would  then 
be  difficult,  in  1828,  to  elect  Clay,  another  western 
man  ;  but  Adams  would  have  more  strength.  If 
Adams  should  be  elected  in  1824,  the  election  of 
Clay,  as  a  western  man,  in  1828,  would  be  easier, 
especially  if  Adams  would  give  him  the  Secretary- 
ship.5 On  the  25th  of  January,  the  day  after  the 
western  delegations  came  out  for  Adams,  an  an- 
onymous letter  appeared  in  the  "  Columbian  Obser- 
ver," of  Philadelphia,  predicting  a  bargain  between 
Adams  and  Clay.  Kremer,  member  of  the  House 

1  Clay's  Speech,  1838;  54Niles,  68. 

2  Crawford  was  taken  to  the  Capitol  for  a  few  hours,  a  day  or 
two  before  the  election,  but  he  was  apparently  a  wreck.     Cobb, 
218. 

3  Blair  and  Kendall,  in  1824,  were  Clay  men.     They  were  both 
active,  in  1825,  in  urging  Clay  men  to  vote  for  Adams.     40  Niles, 
73  ;   Telegraph  Extra,  300  et  seq. 

4  27  Niles,  386. 

5  Telegraph  Extra,  321. 


CHARGE  OF  CORRUPT  BARGAIN          121 

from  Pennsylvania,  avowed  his  responsibility  for 
the  letter,  although  it  has  generally  been  believed 
that  he  could  not  have  written  it.  Clay  demanded 
an  investigation  in  the  House,  and  a  committee  was 
raised,  but  Kremer  declined  to  answer  its  interro- 
gatories. The  letter  was  another  case  of  the  gene- 
ral device  of  laying  down  anchors  for  strains  which 
would  probably  need  to  be  exerted  later.  It  would 
not  do  for  Kremer  to  admit  that  the  assertion  in 
the  letter  was  only  a  surmise  of  his.  It  certainly 
was  a  clever  trick.  The  charge  would  either  pre- 
vent Clay  from  going  into  Adams's  cabinet,  lest  he 
should  give  proofs  of  the  truth  of  the  imputation, 
or,  if  he  did  go  into  the  cabinet,  this  letter  would 
serve  as  a  kind  of  evidence  of  a  bargain.  Imme- 
diately after  the  inauguration,  Kremer  made  this 
latter  use  of  it  in  an  address  to  his  constituents.1 
On  the  20th  of  February,  Jackson  wrote  a  letter 
to  Lewis,  in  which  he  affirmed  and  condemned  the 
bargain.  Lewis  published  this  letter  in  Tennessee. 
February  22d,  Jackson  wrote  a  letter  to  Swartwout, 
in  which  he  spoke  very  bitterly  of  Clay,  and  re- 
sented Clay's  criticism  of  him  as  a  "  military 
chieftain."  He  sneered  at  Clay  as  not  a  military 
chieftain.  But  he  did  not  allege  any  bargain. 
Swartwout  published  this  letter  in  New  York.2 
Both  letters  were  plainly  prepared  by  Jackson's 
followers  for  publication.  Clay  replied  at  the  end 
of  March  in  a  long  statement.3 

Jackson  remained  in  Washington  until  the  mid- 
*  28  NUes,  21.  2  28  Niles,  20.     •          8  28  Niles,  71. 


122  ANDREW  JACKSON 

die  of  March.  He  was  present  at  the  inauguration, 
and  preserved  all  the  forms  in  his  public  demeanor 
towards  Adams.1  His  rage  was  all  directed  against 
Clay.  In  the  Senate  there  were  fifteen  votes 
against  Clay's  confirmation,  but  no  charges  were 
made  there.2  On  his  way  home  Jackson  scattered 
the  charge  as  he  went.  It  is  to  his  own  lips  that 
it  is  always  traceable,  when  it  can  be  brought  home 
to  anybody.  Up  to  this  time  it  is  questionable 
whether  Jackson  was  more  annoyed  or  pleased  at 
being  run  for  President.  Now  that  the  element  of 
personal  contest  was  imported  into  the  enterprise, 
his  whole  being  became  absorbed  in  the  determi- 
nation to  achieve  victory.  There  was  now  a  foe  to 
be  crushed,  a  revenge  to  be  obtained  for  an  injury 
endured.  He  did  not  measure  his  words,  and  the 
charge  gained  amplitude  and  definiteness  as  he 
repeated  it.  In  March,  1827,  Carter  Beverly,  of 
North  Carolina,  wrote  to  a  friend  an  account  of  a 
visit  to  Jackson,  and  a  report  of  Jackson's  circum- 
stantial assertion,  at  his  own  table,  that  Clay's 
friends  offered  to  support  Jackson,  it  Jackson 
would  promise  not  to  continue  Adams  as  Secretary 
of  State.  Beverly's  letter  was  published  at  Fay- 
etteville,  North  Carolina.3  In  June,  Jackson 
wrote  to  Beverly  an  explicit  repetition  over  his 
own  signature.4  The  charge  had  now  a  name  and 
a  responsible  person  behind  it,  —  Jackson  himself. 

1  28  Niles,  19. 

2  Branch  made  some  allusions  and  vague  comments.    33  Niles, 
22.  »  32  NUes,  162.  *  32  Niles,  315. 


ADAMS  AND  CLAY  123 

Clay  at  once  called  on  him  for  his  authorities  and 
proofs.  Jackson  named  Buchanan  as  his  au- 
thority.1 Buchanan  had  been  one  of  the  active 
ones  2  that  winter,  but  he  had  blundered.  He  now 
made  a  statement  which  was  not  straightforward 
either  way,  but  it  did  not  support  Jackson's  state- 
ment. He  distinctly  said  that  he  had  never  been 
commissioned  by  the  Clay  men  for  anything  he 
had  said  to  Jackson  about  appointing  Adams.3 
Clay  then  called  on  Jackson  to  retract,  since  his 
only  authority  had  failed.  Jackson  made  no  an- 
swer. He  never  forgave  Buchanan.  In  1842, 
Carter  Beverly  wrote  to  Clay  that  the  charge  had 
never  been  substantiated,  and  that  he  regretted 
having  helped  to  spread  it.4  At  Maysville,  in  1843, 
Adams  made  a  solemn  denial  of  the  charge.5  May 
3,  1844,  Jackson  reiterated  the  charge  in  a  letter  to 
the  "  Nashville  Union."  He  said :  "  Of  the  charges 
brought  against  Mr.  Adams  and  Mr.  Clay  at  that 
time,  I  formed  my  opinions,  as  the  country  at  large 
did,  from  facts  and  circumstances  which  were  in- 
disputable and  conclusive,  and  I  may  add  that  this 
opinion  has  undergone  no  change."6  Of  course 
this  means  that  he  inferred  the  charge  from  Clay's 
appointment,  never  had  any  other  ground  for  it, 
and  therefore  had  as  much  ground  in  1844  as  in 
1825.  Clay  never  escaped  the  odium  of  this  charge 
while  he  lived.  At  Lexington,  Ky.,  in  1842,  he 

1  32  Niles,  415.  2  Markley's  Letter,  33  Niles,  167. 

8  32  Niles,  416;  1  Curtis's  Buchanan,  42,  511. 

*  61  Niles,  403.  5  11  Adams,  431.  «  66  Niles,  247. 


124  ANDREW  JACKSON 

said  that  he  thought  he  should  have  been  wiser  if 
he  had  not  taken  office  under  Adams.1 

On  the  publication  of  Adams's  "  Diary,"  proba- 
bly all  students  of  American  political  history  turned 
to  see  what  relations  with  Clay  were  noted  in  the 
winter  of  1824-25.  Clay  and  Adams  had  never 
been  intimate.  Their  tastes  were  by  no  means 
congenial.  There  was  an  "  adjourned  question  of 
veracity  "  outstanding  between  them,  because  Clay 
had  given  vague  support  to  the  charge  against 
Adams  about  the  fisheries  and  the  Mississippi,  and 
Adams  had  challenged  him  to  produce  the  proof, 
which  would  impeach  Adams's  own  story  of  the 
negotiations  at  Ghent.  Clay  had  never  answered. 
December  17,  1824,  Letcher,  as  one  of  Clay's  near- 
est friends,  called  on  Adams.  "The  drift  of  all 
Letcher 's  discourse  was  .  .  .  that  Clay  would  will- 
ingly support  me,  if  he  could  thereby  serve  him- 
self, and  the  substance  of  his  meaning  was,  that  if 
Clay's  friends  could  know  that  he  would  have  a 
prominent  share  in  the  administration,  that  might 
induce  them  to  vote  for  me,  even  in  the  face  of  in- 
structions. But  Letcher  did  not  profess  to  have 
any  authority  from  Clay  for  what  he  said,  and  he 
made  no  definite  propositions."  2  January  1, 1825, 
Clay  and  Adams  met  by  Letcher 's  intervention.3 
Adams  recorded  in  1828 4  that  Letcher  told  him, 
January  2,  1825,  that  Kentucky  would  vote  for 
him.  January  9th  Clay  told  Adams  that  he  should 

1  62  Niles,  291.  2  6  Adams,  447. 

8  Qf.  8  Adams,  337  (1831).  *  7  Adams,  462. 


ADAMS  AND  CLAY  125 

vote  for  him,  and  said  that  Crawford's  friends  and 
Adams's  friends  had  approached  him  with  personal 
considerations.  January  21st  Scott,  of  Missouri, 
who  held  the  vote  of  that  State,  told  Adams 
that  he  wanted  Clay  to  be  in  the  administration. 
Adams  replied  that  he  could  give  no  assurances, 
but  that,  in  looking  for  a  western  man,  he  could 
not  overlook  Clay.  On  the  same  day,  in  answer 
to  fears  that  he  would  proscribe  the  federalists,  he 
answered  that  he  would  try  to  break  up  the  old 
parties.  February  3d  Webster  called  on  Adams 
about  the  proscription  of  the  federalists.1  Adams 
said  that  he  could  give  no  assurances  about  his 
cabinet,  but  would  try  to  harmonize  parties.2 

The  Jackson  men  found  another  grievance  in  the 
election  of  Adams.  They  revived  a  doctrine  which 
had  been  advocated  in  1801,  to  the  effect  that  the 
House  of  Representatives  ought  simply  to  carry 
out  "  the  will  of  the  people,"  as  indicated  by  the 
plurality  vote.  Benton  is  the  chief  advocate  of 
this  doctrine.3  He  faces  all  the  consequences  of  it 
without  flinching.  He  says  plainly  that  there  was 
a  struggle  "  between  the  theory  of  the  Constitution 
and  the  democratic  principle."  The  Constitution 

1  The  federalists  all  hated  Adams  for  "ratting."     In  1828, 
Timothy  Pickering-  was  a  Jackson  man ;  not  that  he  loved  demo- 
cracy more,  but  that  he  hated  Jackson  less.     34  Niles,  246. 

2  1  Curtis's  Webster,  237. 

8  31  Niles,  98,  gives  a  homely  but  very  pungent  criticism  of 
Lenton's  doctrine.  It  consists  in  showing  what  the  "  will  of  the 
people"  is,  when  the  State  divisions,  Senate  equality,  and  negro 
representation  are  taken  into  account. 


126  ANDREW   JACKSON 

gives  to  the  House  of  Representatives  the  right 
and  power  to  elect  the  President  in  a  certain  con- 
tingency. There  is  no  provision  at  all  in  the  Con- 
stitution for  the  election  of  President  by  a  great 
national  democratic  majority.  The  elected  Presi- 
dent is  the  person  who  gets  a  majority  of  the  votes 
constitutionally  described  and  cast,  and  the  power 
and  right  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  in  the 
contingency  which  the  Constitution  provides  for,  is 
just  as  complete  as  that  of  the  electoral  college  in 
all  other  cases.  But  the  electoral  college  by  no 
means  necessarily  produces  the  selection  which  ac- 
cords with  the  majority  of  the  popular  vote.  The 
issue  raised  by  Benton  and  his  friends  was  there- 
fore nothing  less  than  constitutional  government 
versus  democracy.  The  Constitution  does  not  put 
upon  the  House  the  function  of  raising  a  plurality 
vote  to  a  majority,  for  the  obvious  reason  that  it 
would  be  simpler  to  let  a  plurality  elect.  The  Con- 
stitution provides  only  specified  ways  for  ascertain- 
ing "  the  will  of  the  people,"  and  that  will  does 
not  rule  unless  it  is  constitutionally  expressed. 
That  is  why  we  are,  fortunately,  under  a  consti- 
tutional system,  and  not  under  an  unlimited  and 
ever-changing  democracy.  Benton  and  those  who 
agreed  with  him  were,  as  he  avows,  making  an 
assault  on  the  Constitution,  when  they  put  forward 
their  doctrine  of  the  function  of  the  House.  On 
that  doctrine  the  Constitution  is  every  one's  tool 
while  it  answers  his  purposes,  and  the  sport  of 
every  faction  which  finds  it  an  obstacle,  if  they  can 


DEMOCRACY  VERSUS  THE  CONSTITUTION    127 

only  manage  to  carry  an  election.  Their  might 
and  their  right  become  one  and  the  same  thing,  — 
guarantees  of  each  other.  Such  a  doctrine  is  one 
of  the  most  pernicious  political  heresies.  A  con- 
stitution is  to  a  nation  what  self-control  under 
established  rules  of  conduct  is  to  a  man.  The 
only  time  when  it  is  of  value  is  just  the  time  when 
the  temptation  to  violate  it  is  strong,  and  that  is 
the  time  when  it  contravenes  temporary  and  party 
interests. 

In  its  practical  aspects,  also,  the  election  of  1824 
showed  how  pernicious  and  false  Benton's  doctrine 
is.  "  The  will  of  the  people,"  to  which  he  referred 
as  paramount,  was  an  inference  only.  The  mo- 
ment we  depart  from  constitutional  methods  of 
ascertaining  the  will  of  the  people,  we  shall  always 
be  driven  to  inferences  which  will,  in  the  last  ana- 
lysis, be  found  to  rest  upon  nothing  but  party  pre- 
judices, and  party  hopes.  In  the  vote  of  1824  the 
facts  were  as  follows  :  Clay's  States  indicated,  as 
their  second  choice,  Jackson.  Jackson's  friends 
inferred  that,  if  Clay  had  not  been  running,  Jack- 
son would  have  carried  those  States  and  would  have 
been  elected.  Going  farther,  however,  we  find  that 
in  New  Jersey  and  Maryland  the  Crawford  men 
supported  Jackson  to  weaken  Adams.  In  North 
Carolina,  Adams  men  supported  Jackson  to  weaken 
Crawford.  In  Louisiana,  Adams  men  and  Jackson 
men  combined  to  weaken  Clay.1  Hence  Jackson 
got  the  whole  or  a  part  of  the  vote  of  these  four 

1  I  Annual  Eegister,  40. 


128  ANDREW  JACKSON 

States  by  bargain  and  combination.  How  many 
more  undercurrents  of  combination  and  secondary 
intention  there  may  have  been  is  left  to  conjecture. 
What  then  becomes  of  the  notion  of  "  the  will  of 
the  people,"  as  some  pure  and  sacred  emanation 
only  to  be  heard  and  obeyed  ?  No  election  pro- 
duces any  such  pure  and  sacred  product,  but  only  a 
practical,  very  limited,  imperfect,  and  approximate 
expression  of  public  opinion,  by  which  we  manage 
to  carry  on  public  affairs.  The  "  demos  krateo 
principle,"  to  use  Ben  ton's  jargon,  belongs  in  the 
same  category  with  Louis  Fourteenth's  saying: 
Z/'etat,  cjest  moi.  One  is  as  far  removed  from  con- 
stitutional liberty  as  the  other. 

Let  it  be  noted,  however,  that  this  suggestion  of 
Benton  was  far  more  than  a  preposterous  notion 
which  we  can  set  aside  by  a  little  serious  discus- 
sion. He  touched  the  portentous  antagonism  which 
is  latent  in  the  American  system  of  the  State, — 
the  antagonism  between  the  democratic  principle 
and  the  constitutional  institutions.  The  grandest 
issue  that  can  ever  arise  in  American  political  life 
is  whether,  when  that  antagonism  is  developed  into 
active  conflict,  the  democratic  principle  or  the  con-, 
stitutional  institution  will  prevail. 

Crawford  went  home  to  Georgia,  disappointed, 
broken  in  health,  his  political  career  entirely 
ended.  He  recovered  his  health  to  some  extent. 
He  became  a  circuit  judge,  and  gave  to  Calhoun, 
five  years  later,  very  positive  evidence  that  he  was 
still  alive.  He  died  in  1834. 


CHAPTER  V 


THE  presidential  office  underwent  a  great  change 
at  the  election  of  1824.  The  congressional  caucus 
had,  up  to  that  time,  proceeded  on  the  theory  that 
the  President  was  to  be  a  great  national  statesman, 
who  stood  at  the  head  of  his  party,  or  among  the 
leaders  of  it.  There  were  enthusiastic  rejoicings 
that  "  King  Caucus "  was  dethroned  and  dead. 
What  killed  the  congressional  caucus  was  the  fact 
that,  with  four  men  running,  the  adherents  of  three 
of  them  were  sure  to  combine  against  the  caucus, 
on  account  of  the  advantage  which  it  would  give  to 
the  one  who  was  expected  to  get  its  nomination. 
However,  it  was  a  great  error  to  say  that  King 
Caucus  was  dead.  Looking  back  on  it  now,  we 
see  that  the  caucus  had  only  burst  the  bonds  of 
the  chrysalis  state  and  entered  on  a  new  stage 
of  life  and  growth. 

Jackson  was  fully  recognized  as  the  coming  man, 
There  was  no  fighting  against  his  popularity.  The 
shrewdest  politician  was  he  who  should  seize  upon 
that  popularity  as  an  available  force,  and  prove 
capable  of  controlling  it  for  his  purposes.  Van 
Buren  proved  himself  to  be  the  man  for  this  func- 


130  ANDREW   JACKSON 

tion.  He  usurped  the  position  of  Jackson  leader 
in  New  York,  which  seemed  by  priority  to  belong 
to  Clinton.  He  and  the  other  Crawford  leaders 
had  had  a  hard  task  to  run  a  man  who  seemed  to 
be  physically  incapacitated  for  the  duties  of  the 
presidency,  but  when  Crawford's  health  broke 
down  it  was  too  late  for  them  to  change  the  whole 
plan  of  their  campaign.  After  the  election  they 
joined  the  Jackson  party.  The  "  era  of  good  feel- 
ing "  had  brought  into  politics  a  large  number  of 
men,1  products  of  the  continually  advancing  politi- 
cal activity  amongst  the  less  educated  classes,  who 
were  eager  for  notoriety  and  spoils,  for  genteel  liv- 
ing without  work,  and  for  public  position.  These 
men  were  ready  to  be  the  janizaries  of  any  party 
which  would  pay  well.  They  all  joined  the  oppo- 
sition, because  they  had  nothing  to  expect  from  the 
administration.  All  the  factions  except  the  Adams 
faction,  that  is  to  say,  all  the  federalists  and  all  the 
non-Adams  personal  factions  of  the  old  republican 
party,  went  into  opposition.  These  elements  were 
very  incoherent  in  their  political  creeds  and  their 
political  codes,  but  they  made  common  cause.2 
They  organized  at  once  an  opposition  of  the  most 
violent  and  factious  kind.  Long  before  any  politi- 
cal questions  arose,  they  developed  a  determination 
to  oppose  to  the  last  whatever  the  administration 
should  favor.  They  fought  for  four  years  to  make 

1  3  Ann.  Reg.  10. 

2  The  new  groupings  caused  intense  astonishment  to  simple- 
minded  observers.    See  32  NUes,  339. 


ORGANIZATION   OF  FACTIONS  131 

capital  for  the  next  election,  as  the  chief  business 
of  Congress.  John  Randolph,  who  by  long  practice 
had  become  a  virtuoso  in  abuse,  exhausted  his 
powers  in  long  tirades  of  sarcasm  and  sensational 
denunciations,  chiefly  against  Clay.  The  style 
of  smartness  which  he  was  practising  reached  its 
climax  when  he  called  the  administration  an  alli- 
ance of  Blifil  and  Black  George,  the  Puritan  and 
the  Black-leg.  He  and  Clay  fought  a  duel,  on 
which  occasion,  however,  Randolph  fired  in  the  air. 
After  Jackson's  election,  Randolph  was  given  the 
mission  to  Russia,  and  was  guilty  of  a  number  of 
the  abuses  which  he  had  scourged  most  freely  in 
others.  He  had  to  endure  hostile  criticism,  as  a 
matter  of  course,  and  he  learned  the  misery  of  a 
public  man  forced  to  make  "  explanations  "  under 
malignant  charges.  He  proved  to  be  as  thin- 
skinned  as  most  men  of  his  stamp  are  when  their 
turn  comes.1 

Van  Buren  initiated  the  opposition  into  the 
methods  and  doctrines  of  New  York  politics.  Ever 
since  the  republicans  wrested  that  State  from  the 
federalists,  in  1800,  they  had  been  working  out  the 
methods  of  organization  by  which  an  oligarchy  of 
a  half  dozen  leaders  could,  under  the  forms  of  de- 
mocratic-republican self-government,  control  the 
State.  As  soon  as  the  federalists  were  defeated, 
the  republicans  broke  up  into  factions.  Each  fac- 
tion, when  it  gained  power,  proscribed  the  others. 
Until  1821  the  patronage,  which  was  the  cohesive 
1  2  Garland's  Randolph,  339. 


132  ANDREW   JACKSON 

material  by  which  party  organization  was  cemented, 
was  in  the  hands  of  a  "  council "  at  Albany.  After 
1821  the  patronage,  by  way  of  reform,  was  con- 
verted into  elective  offices.  It  then  became  neces- 
sary to  devise  a  new  system  adapted  to  this  new 
arrangement,  and  all  the  arts  by  which  the  results 
of  primaries,  conventions,  committees,  and  cau- 
cuses, while  following  all  the  forms  of  spontaneous 
action,  can  be  made  to  conform  to  the  programme 
of  the  oligarchy  or  the  Boss,  were  speedily  devel- 
oped. If  now  the  presidency  was  no  longer  to  be 
the  crown  of  public  service,  and  the  prize  of  a  very 
limited  number  of  statesmen  of  national  reputa- 
tion, —  if  it  was  conceivable  that  an  Indian  fighter 
like  Jackson  could  come  within  the  range  of  choice, 
—  then  the  presidency  must  be  ever  after  the  posi- 
tion reserved  for  popular  heroes,  or,  in  the  absence 
of  such,  for  "  available  "  men,  as  the  figure-heads 
with  and  around  whom  a  faction  of  party  leaders 
could  come  to  power.  King  Caucus  was  not  dead, 
then.  He  had  lost  a  town  and  gained  an  empire. 
It  remained  to  develop  and  extend  over  the  whole 
country  an  organization  of  which  the  public  service 
should  constitute  the  network.  There  would  be 
agents  everywhere  to  receive  and  execute  orders, 
to  keep  watch,  and  to  make  reports.  The  central 
authority  would  dispose  of  the  whole  as  a  general 
disposes  of  his  army.  The  general  of  the  "  outs  " 
would  recruit  his  forces  from  those  who  hoped  for 
places  when  the  opposition  should  come  in.  As 
there  were  two  or  three  "  outs  "  who  wanted  each 


THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  133 

place  held  by  those  who  were  "  in,"  recruits  were 
not  lacking.  It  was  during  Adams's  administra- 
tion that  the  opposition  introduced  on  the  federal 
arena  the  method  of  organizing  federal  parties  by 
the  use  of  the  spoils,  which  method  had  been  previ- 
ously perfected  in  the  State  politics  of  New  York. 
The  opposition  invented  and  set  in  action  two 
or  three  new  institutions.  They  organized  local 
Jackson  committees  up  arid  down  the  country, 
somewhat  on  the  plan  of  the  old  revolutionary 
committees  of  correspondence  and  safety.  It  was 
the  duty  of  these  committees  to  carry  on  a  propa- 
ganda for  Jackson,  to  contradict  and  refute  charges 
against  him,  to  make  known  his  services,  to  assail 
the  administration,  and  to  communicate  facts,  ar- 
guments, reports,  etc.,  to  each  other.  Jackson 
had  had  a  "  literary  bureau  "  at  work  in  Washing- 
ton in  1824.  He  wrote  to  tell  Lewis  who  the 
writers  were,  viz.  Eaton,  Houston,  and  Isaacs.  He 
mentioned  a  case  in  which  Eaton  was  conducting 
both  sides  of  a  discussion,  on  the  approved  plan, 
under  two  pseudonyms.1  Partisan  newspaper 
writing  was  also  employed  to  an  unprecedented 
extent.  The  partisan  editor,  who  uses  his  paper 
to  reiterate  and  inculcate  statements  of  fact  and 
doctrine  designed  to  affect  the  mind  of  the  voter, 
was  not  a  new  figure  in  politics,  but  now  there 
appeared  all  over  the  country  small  local  news- 
papers, edited  by  men  who  assumed  the  attitude 
of  party  advocates,  and  pursued  one  side  only  of 
i  Ford  MSS. 


134  ANDREW  JACKSON 

all  public  questions,  disregarding  truth,  right, 
and  justice,  determined  only  to  win.  In  1826,  at 
Calhoun's  suggestion,  an  "  organ  "  was  started  at 
Washington,  the  "Telegraph,"  edited  by  Duff 
Green,  of  Missouri.  The  organ  gave  the  key  to 
all  the  local  party  newspapers. 

Adams  showed,  in  his  inaugural,  some  feeling 
of  the  unfortunate  and  unfair  circumstances  of  his 
position.  He  said  :  "  Less  possessed  of  your  confi- 
dence in  advance  than  any  of  my  predecessors,  I 
am  deeply  conscious  of  the  prospect  that  I  shall 
stand  more  and  oftener  in  need  of  your  indul- 
gence." In  October,  the  Legislature  of  Tennessee 
nominated  Jackson  for  1828,  and  he  appeared  be- 
fore the  Legislature  to  receive  an  address  and  to 
make  a  reply.  He  resigned  the  senator  ship  in  a 
very  careful  and  well-written  letter,1  in  which  he 
urged  (referring,  as  everybody  understood,  to 
Clay's  appointment)  that  an  amendment  to  the 
Constitution  should  be  adopted  forbidding  the  ap- 
pointment to  an  office  in  the  gift  of  the  President 
of  any  member  of  Congress  during,  or  for  two 
years  after,  his  term  of  office  in  Congress.2  In 
this  letter  he  said  that  the  senatorship  had  been 

1  29  Niles,  156. 

2  Robert  G.  Harper  once  testified  in  a  court  of  law  his  personal 
belief,  founded  on  general  knowledge  and  inference,  that  Burr 
could  have  been  elected  in  1801,  if  he  would  have  used  "  certain 
means,"  and  his  belief  that  Jefferson  did  use  those  means.     23 
Niles,    282.     He  referred   to   the   appointment   by   Jefferson   to 
lucrative  offices  of  Linn,  of  New  Jersey,  and  Claiborne,  of  Ten- 
nessee (each  of  whom  controlled  the  vote  of  a  State),  and  also 


METHODS  OF  THE  OPPOSITION  135 

given  to  him  in  1823  without  effort  or  solicitation ; 
also  that  he  made  it  a  rule  neither  to  seek  nor  de- 
cline office.  In  his  speech  before  the  Legislature 
he  spoke  more  freely  of  the  corruption  at  Wash- 
ington, from  which  he  sought  to  escape  by  resign- 
ing.1 He  now  had  Livingston,  Eaton,  Lee,  Van 
Buren,  Benton,  Swartwout,  Duff  Green,  and  Lewis 
managing  his  canvas,  some  of  them  at  Washington 
and  some  in  Tennessee.  They  kept  close  watch 
over  him,  and  maintained  constant  communication 
with  each  other. 

The  first  overt  acts  of  the  opposition  were  the 
objection  to  Clay's  confirmation,  and  the  rejection 
of  the  treaty  with  Colombia.  Clay  had  been  a 
champion  of  the  South  American  republics,  and 
everything  in  the  way  of  intimacy  with  them  was 
capital  for  him.  These  votes  occurred  in  March, 
1825.  The  "  Annual  Register,"  commenting,  over 
a  year  later,  on  these  votes,  said  :  u  The  divisions 
which  had  been  taken  on  the  foregoing  questions 
[those  mentioned]  left  little  doubt  that  the  new 
administration  was  destined  to  meet  with  a  sys- 
tematic and  organized  opposition,  and,  previous  to 
the  next  meeting  of  Congress,  the  ostensible 
grounds  of  opposition  were  set  forth  at  public 

of  Livingston,  who  could  have  divided  the  vote  of  New  York.  36 
Niles,  197.  According  to  a  return  made  to  a  call  by  Congress 
in  1826,  the  number  of  members  of  Congress  appointed  to  office 
by  the  Presidents  down  to  that  time  was :  by  Washington,  10 ;  by 
Adams,  13  ;  by  Jefferson,  25 ;  by  Madison,  29 ;  by  Monroe,  35 ; 
by  J.  Q.  Adams,  in  his  first  year,  5.  36  Niles,  267. 
1  1  Ann.  Beg.  21. 


136  ANDREW  JACKSON 

dinners  and  meetings,  so  as  to  prepare  the  com- 
munity  for  a  warm  political  contest  until  the  next 
election." l  The  public  was  greatly  astonished  at 
the  uproar  among  the  politicians.  The  nation  ac- 
quiesced in  the  result  of  the  election  as  perfectly 
constitutional  and  regular,  and  it  cost  great  effort 
to  stir  up  an  artificial  heat  and  indignation  about 
it.  The  "  bargain  "  formed  the  first  stock  or  capi- 
tal of  the  opposition.  The  claim  that  Jackson  had 
been  cheated  out  of  his  election  was  the  second. 
This  became  an  article  of  the  political  creed,  and 
it  was  the  most  efficacious  means  of  stirring  up 
party  rage,  although  no  one  could  tell  how  he  was 
cheated.  It  was  a  splendid  example  of  the  power 
of  persistent  clamor  without  facts  or  reason.  Some 
attempt  was  made  to  get  up  a  cry  about  "  family 
influence,"  but  this  did  not  take.  The  charge  of 
bargain  and  fraud  was  so  assiduously  reiterated 
that,  in  1827,  there  were  six  senators  and  forty 
representatives  who  would  not  call  on  the  Presi- 
dent.2 It  was  during  the  session  of  1825-26  that 
the  discordant  elements  of  the  opposition  coalesced 
into  a  party,3  the  democratic  party  of  the  next 
twenty  years.  Near  the  end  of  the  session  a  pro- 
minent Virginia  politician  declared  that  the  com- 
binations for  electing  Jackson  in  1828  were  already 
formed.4 

1  1  Ann.  Reg.  38. 

2  7  Adams,  374.     The  federal  members  of  Congress  would  not 
Visit  Madison  in  1815.    1  Curtis's  Webster,  135. 

*  1  Ann.  Keg.  22.  *  Ibid. 


METHODS  OF  THE  OPPOSITION  137 

It  was  proposed  to  adopt  a  constitutional  amend- 
ment taking  away  the  contingent  power  of  the 
House  to  elect  a  President,  but  no  agreement  could 
be  reached.  A  committee  on  executive  patronage 
was  raised,  in  reality  to  provide  electioneering  ma- 
terial. This  committee  reported  six  bills,  the  most 
important  of  which  provided  that  the  President 
might  not  appoint  to  office  any  person  who  had 
been  a  member  of  Congress  during  his  own  term 
in  the  presidential  office,  and  that  the  President,  if 
he  should  remove  any  officer,  should  state  his 
reasons  to  the  Senate  on  the  appointment  of  a  suc- 
cessor. No  action  was  taken. 

The  topic,  however,  on  which  the  opposition 
most  distinctly  showed  their  spirit  was  the  Panama 
mission.  Benton  misrepresents  that  affair  more 
grossly  than  any  other  on  which  he  touches.  The 
fact  is  that  the  opposition  were  forced  by  their 
political  programme  to  oppose  a  measure  which  it 
was  very  awkward  for  them  to  oppose,  and  they 
were  compelled  to  ridicule  and  misrepresent  the 
matter  in  order  to  cover  their  position.  Sargent l 
tells  a  story  of  an  opposition  senator,  who,  when 
rallied  on  the  defeat  of  the  opposition,  in  the  vote 
on  confirming  the  commissioners,  replied:  "Yes, 
they  have  beaten  us  by  a  few  votes  after  a  hard 
battle ;  but  if  they  had  only  taken  the  other  side 
and  refused  the  mission,  we  should  have  had 
them  !  "  The  opposition  vehemently  denounced 
the  Monroe  doctrine.  They  would  not  print  the 

1  1  Sargent,  117. 


138  ANDREW  JACKSON 

instructions   to   the   commissioners   because  these 
would  have  refuted  the  exaggerated  denunciations. 
*  It  was  not  until  1829  that  public  opinion  forced 
the  printing.1 

Adams  had  strong  convictions  about  points  of 
public  policy.  He  held  that  it  was  the  duty  of  the 
President  to  advise  and  recommend  to  Congress 
such  measures  as  he  thought  desirable  in  the  public 
interest,  and  then  to  leave  to  Congress  the  respon- 
sibility if  nothing  was  done.  He  therefore  set  out 
in  his  messages  series  of  acts  and  measures  which 
he  thought  should  be  adopted.  He  thereby  played 
directly  into  the  hands  of  the  opposition,  for  they 
then  had  a  complete  programme  before  them  of 
what  they  had  to  attack.  Adams  held  the  active 
theory  of  statesmanship.  He  was  not  content  to 
let  the  people  alone.  He  thought  that  a  statesman 
could  foresee,  plan,  prepare,  open  the  way,  set  in 
action,  encourage,  and  otherwise  care  for  the  people. 
To  him  the  doctrine  of  implied  powers  meant  only 
that  the  Constitution  had  created  a  government 
complete  and  adequate  for  all  the  functions  which 
devolved  upon  it  in  caring  for  all  the  interests 
which  were  confided  to  it.  He  regarded  the  new 
land  as  a  joint  possession  of  all  the  States,  the  sale 
of  which  would  provide  funds  which  ought  to  be 
used  to  build  roads,  bridges,  and  canals,  and  to 
carry  out  other  works  of  internal  improvement, 
which,  as  he  thought,  would  open  up  the  con- 
tinent to  civilization.2  He  cared  more  for  internal 
1  They  are  to  be  found,  4  Ann.  Reg.  29.  2  9  Adams,  162. 


PARTY  ISSUES  139 

improvements  than  for  a  protective  tariff.1  He 
wanted  a  national  university  and  a  naval  school. 
He  favored  expenditures  on  fortifications  and  a 
navy  and  an  adequate  army.  He  wanted  the 
federal  judiciary  enlarged  and  a  bankruptcy  law 
passed.  Some  of  the  opposition  found  the  party 
exigency  severe,  which  forced  them  to  oppose  all 
the  points  in  this  programme.  In  1824  Crawford 
had  been  the  only  stickler  for  State  rights  and 
strict  construction.  Calhoun  and  his  friends  had 
been  on  the  other  side.  The  old-fashioned  pet- 
tifogging of  the  strict  constructionists,  and  the 
cast-iron  dogmatism  of  the  State  rights  men,  were 
developed  in  the  heat  of  the  factious  opposition  of 
1825-29.  All  that,  however,  before  that  time  had 
been  considered  extreme  or  "  radical."  Van  Buren, 
on  his  reelection  to  the  Senate  in  1827,  wrote  a 
letter  in  which  he  promised  to  recover  for  the 
States  the  "  rights  of  which  they  had  been  de- 
prived by  construction,"  and  to  save  what  rights 
remained.2  Hammond  expresses  the  quiet  astonish- 
ment which  this  created  in  the  minds  of  the  people, 
even  democrats  like  himself,  who  were  not  aware 
that  the  States  had  suffered  any  wrong,  especially 
at  the  hands  of  the  existing  administration.  The 
country  was  in  profound  peace  and  stupid  pro- 
sperity, and  the  rancor  of  the  politicians  seemed 
inexplicable.  The  public  debt  was  being  refunded 
advantageously.  Immigration  was  large  and  grow- 
ing. The  completion  of  the  Erie  Canal  in  1825 
1  8  Adams,  444.  2  2  Hammond,  246. 


140  ANDREW  JACKSON 

opened  up  the  great  lakes  to  navigation,  and  the 
adjacent  country  to  settlement.  Public  affairs  were 
in  fact  dull.  The  following  passage  from  the 
"  Annual  Register  "  shows  the  impression  made  by 
the  agitation  at  Washington  : 1  — 

"Nearly  all  the  propositions  which  were  called  for 
by  the  popular  voice  were  defeated,  either  from  want 
of  time  for  their  consideration,  or  by  an  influence 
which  seemed  to  exert  itself  for  the  sole  purpose  of 
rendering  those  who  administered  the  government  un- 
popular. The  community  was  generally  disappointed 
as  to  the  results  of  the  session.  .  .  .  Many  of  the 
members  were  new  to  political  life.  .  .  .  Others  were 
predetermined  to  opposition,  and  from  the  first  as- 
sembling of  Congress  devoted  themselves  to  thwarting 
the  measures  which  its  [the  administration's]  friends 
urged  upon  the  consideration  of  Congress.  The  Vice- 
President  and  his  friends  were  most  prominent  in  this 
class  of  politicians.  .  .  .  The  manner,  too,  in  which  the 
opposition  attacked  the  administration  displayed  an  ex- 
asperated feeling,  in  which  the  community  did  not 
sympathize,  and  a  general  suspicion  was  felt  that  its 
leaders  were  actuated  by  private  griefs,  and  that  the 
public  interests  were  neglected  in  their  earnest  struggle 
for  power.  The  pride  of  the  country,  too,  had  received 
a  deep  wound  in  the  prostration  of  the  dignity  of  the 
Senate." 

Calhoun   appointed    committees   hostile   to   the 

administration,  which  could  not  bring  their   own 

party  to  the   support  of   their  reports.     He  also 

ruled  that  it  was  not  the  duty  of  the  Vice-Presi« 

1  1  Ann.  Beg.  149. 


ADAMS'S  POLICY  141 

dent  to  preserve  order,  save  upon  the  initiative  of 
some  senator  on  the  floor.  Great  disorder  oc- 
curred, and  John  Randolph  especially  took  advan- 
tage of  this  license.  The  Senate  was  led,  at  the 
end  of  the  session  of  1825—26,  to  take  from  the 
Vice-President  the  duty  of  appointing  the  commit- 
tees of  the  Senate.  Letters  which  appeared  in 
one  of  the  Washington  newspapers,  signed  "  Pat- 
rick Henry,"  criticising  Calhoun's  course,  were 
ascribed  to  the  President.  Answering  letters, 
signed  "  Onslow,"  were  ascribed  to  the  Vice-Pre- 
sident.1 

Adams  took  no  steps  to  create  an  administration 
party.  He  offered  the  Treasury  to  Crawford,  who 
refused  it.  He  then  gave  it  to  Eush,  who  had 
voted  against  him.  The  Secretaries  of  War  and 
of  the  Navy  had  likewise  supported  other  candi- 
dates.2 Adams  refused  to  try  to  secure  the  elec- 
tion of  Jeremiah  Mason,  an  administration  maw,  to 
the  Senate.3  He  had  declared,  before  the  election, 
that  he  should  reward  no  one,  and  proscribe  no 
one.  He  adhered  to  this  faithfully.  Clay  urged 
him  to  avoid  pusillanimity  on  the  one  hand,  and 
persecution  on  the  other.4  The  election  being 
over,  Clay  said  that  no  officer  ought  to  be  allowed 
"  to  hold  a  conduct  in  open  and  continual  dispar- 
agement of  the  administration  and  its  head." 
Adams  replied  that,  in  the  particular  case  under 
discussion  (collector  at  New  Orleans),  there  had 

1  Harper's  Calhoun,  31.  2  Perkins,  289. 

»  7  Adams,  14.  .  .  .      *  6  Adams,  540. 


142  ANDREW  JACKSON 

been  no  overt  act ;  that  four  fifths  of  all  the  cus- 
tom-house officers  had  been  unfavorable  to  his 
(Adams's)  election,  and  were  now  in  his  power ; 
that  he  had  been  urged  to  sweep  them  all  away ; 
that  he  could  not  do  this  as  to  one  without  opening 
the  question  as  to  all,  and  that  he  would  enter  on 
no  such  policy.  In  1826  Clay  urged  Adams  to 
remove  the  custom-house  officers  at  Charleston  and 
Philadelphia.  Adams  refused,  although  he  thought 
that  these  officers  were  using  the  subordinate  offices 
in  their  control  against  the  administration.1  He 
appointed  federalists  when  he  thought  that  they 
were  better  qualified  than  other  candidates.  This 
did  not  conciliate  the  federalists,  and  it  aroused 
all  "  the  wormwood  and  the  gall  "  of  the  old  party 
hatred.2  In  1827  Clay  and  others  urged  him  to 
confine  appointments  to  friends.  He  refused  to 
adopt  that  rule.3  He  expressed  the  belief  that  the 
opposition  were  spending  money  to  poison  public 
opinion  through  the  press,  but  he  would  not  do 
anything  for  Binns,  an  administration  editor.4  In 
June,  1827,  he  refused  to  go  to  Philadelphia,  to 
make  a  speech  in  German  to  the  farmers,  at  the 
opening  of  the  canal,  because  he  objected  to  that 
style  of  electioneering.5  In  October,  1827,  Clay 
tiiade  a  warm  protest  against  Adams's  action  in  re- 
taining McLean,  the  Postmaster-General.  Clay 
alleged  that  McLean  was  using  the  post-office 
patronage  actively  against  the  administration. 

1  7  Adams,  163.     2  7  Adams,  207.    ,8  7  Adams,  257. 
4  7  Adams,  262.     *  7  Adams,  297. 


ADAMS  AND  THE   CIVIL  SERVICE         143 

McLean  hated  Clay  and  loved  Calhoun,1  but  he 
claimed  to  be  a  loyal  friend  of  the  administration. 
Adams  would  not  believe  him  a  traitor.2  A  cam- 
paign story  was  started  that  Adams's  accounts 
with  the  Treasury  were  not  in  order.  Clay  de- 
sired that  Adams  would  correspond  with  an  elec- 
tion committee  in  Kentucky,  and  refute  the 
charge.  Adams  refused,  because  he  disapproved 
of  the  western  style  of  electioneering  and  stump- 
speaking.3  Binns,  an  Irish  refugee,  editor  of  the 
"  Democratic  Press  "  of  Philadelphia,  ought  by  all 
affinities  to  have  been  a  supporter  of  Jackson,  but 
he  took  the  wrong  turning  after  Crawford's  disap- 
pearance, and  became  a  supporter  of  Adams.  He 
plaintively  describes  the  results.  He  tried  to  talk 
to  Adams  about  appointments.  "  I  was  promptly 
told  that  Mr.  President  Adams  did  not  intend  to 
make  any  removals.  I  bowed  respectfully,  assur- 
ing the  President  that  I  had  no  doubt  the  conse- 
quence would  be  that  he  would  himself  be  removed 
so  soon  as  the  term  for  which  he  had  been  elected 
had  expired.  This  intimation  gave  the  President 
no  concern,  and  assuredly  did  in  no  wise  affect  his 
previous  determination."  *  Binns,  however,  was 
wise  in  his  generation. 

Adams's  administration  had  a  majority  in  the 
Senate  until  the  20th  Congress  met  in  1827,  when 
both  Houses  had  opposition  majorities.  Adams 
says  that  this  was  the  first  time  in  the  history  of 

1  7  Adams,  364.  2  7  Adams,  343. 

8  7  Adams,  347.  *  Binns,  250. 


144  ANDREW  JACKSON 

the  country  that  such  had  been  the  case.1  The 
session  of  1827—28  was  almost  entirely  occupied  in 
manufacturing  political  capital.  A  committee  on 
retrenchment  and  reform  presented  a  majority  and 
a  minority  report.  The  majority  expressed  alarm 
at  the  increasing  expenditures  of  the  federal  gov- 
ernment, and  the  extravagance  of  the  administra- 
tion. The  minority  said  that  no  expenditures  had 
been  made  which  Congress  had  not  ordered,  and 
that  the  expenditures  had  not  increased  unduly, 
when  the  size  and  population  of  the  country  were 
considered.  It  was  charged  that  large  sums  had 
been  spent  in  decorating  the  President's  house, 
especially  the  "East  Koom."  Congress  had  ap- 
propriated $25,000  for  the  White  House,  of  which 
$6,000  had  been  spent.  The  rest  was  returned  to 
the  Treasury.  As  soon  as  Jackson  was  elected, 
the  "  Courier  and  Enquirer  "  said  that  the  "  East 
Koom  "  was  very  shabby,  and  would  at  once  be 
made  decent.2  There  was  no  attempt  to  be  fair  or 
truthful  in  these  charges.  They  were  made  solely 
with  a  view  to  effect.  Clamor  and  reiteration 
availed  to  spread  an  opinion  that  the  administra- 
tion had  been  extravagant. 

The  campaign  of  1828  was  conducted,  on  both 
sides,  on  very  ruthless  methods.  Niles  said  that 
it  was  worse  than  the  campaign  of  1798.8  Cam- 
paign extras  of  the  "  Telegraph "  were  issued 
weekly,  containing  partisan  material,  refutations 
of  charges  against  Jackson,  and  slanders  on  Ad< 

1  7  Adams,  367.       2  Quoted  37  Niles,  229.       8  35  Niles,  33. 


TONE  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN  145 

ams  and  Clay.  The  Adams  party  also  published 
a  monthly  of  a  similar  character  :  "  Truth's  Advo- 
cate and  Monthly  Anti-Jackson  Expositor."  The 
country  was  deluged  with  pamphlets  on  both  sides. 
These  pamphlets  were  very  poor  stuff,  and  contain 
nothing  important  on  any  of  the  issues,  and  no 
contribution  to  history.  They  all  appeal  to  low 
tastes  and  motives,  prejudices  and  jealousies. 
Binns  issued  a  number  of  hand-bills,  each  with  a 
coffin  at  the  head,  known  as  "coffin  hand-bills," 
setting  forth  Jackson's  bloody  and  lawless  deeds.1 
One  Jackson  hand-bill  had  a  broad-axe  cut  of 
John  Quincy  Adams  driving  off  with  a  horsewhip 
a  crippled  old  soldier  who  dared  to  speak  to  him 
and  ask  an  alms.  In  short,  campaign  literature 
took  on  a  new  and  special  development  in  this 
campaign,  and  one  is  driven  to  wonder  whether 
the  American  people  of  that  day  were  such  that 
all  this  drivel  and  vulgarity  could  affect  their 
votes. 

Against  Jackson  was  brought  up  his  marriage, 
and  all  the  facts  of  his  career  which  could  be  made 
the  subject  of  unfavorable  comment.  Against 
Adams  were  brought  charges  that  he  gave  to  Web- 
ster and  the  federalists,  in  1824,  a  corrupt  pro- 
mise ;  that  he  was  a  monarchist  and  aristocrat ; 
that  he  refused  to  pay  a  subscription  to  turnpike 
stock  on  a  legal  quibble ;  that  his  wife  was  an 
Englishwoman;  that  he  wrote  a  scurrilous  poem 

1  Binns  says  that  he  issued  these  hand-bills  and  was  mobbed 
in  1824.  It  seems  that  his  memory  failed  him. 


146  ANDREW  JACKSON 

against  Jefferson  in  1802  ;  that  he  surrendered  a 
young  American  servant-woman  to  the  Emperor  of 
Russia ;  that  he  was  rich ;  that  he  was  in  debt  ; 
that  he  had  long  enjoyed  public  office ;  that  he 
had  received  immense  amounts  of  public  money, 
namely,  the  aggregate  of  all  the  salaries,  outfits, 
and  allowances  which  he  had  ever  received ;  that 
his  accounts  with  the  Treasury  were  not  in  order ; 
that  he  had  charged  for  constructive  journeys  ;  that 
he  had  put  a  billiard-table  in  the  White  House  at 
the  public  expense ; 1  that  he  patronized  duellists 
(Clay)  ;  that  he  had  had  a  quarrel  with  his  father, 
who  had  disinherited  him  ;  that  he  had  sent  out 
men  in  the  pay  of  the  government  to  electioneer 
for  him ;  that  he  had  corrupted  the  civil  service ; 
that  he  had  used  the  federal  patronage  to  influence 
elections.  The  federalists,  in  their  turn,  charged 
him  with  not  having  kept  his  promise  to  Webster. 
McLean's  conduct  towards  the  end  of  Adams's 
term  caused  more  and  more  complaint.  He  had 
been  a  Methodist  minister,  and  some  administration 
men  did  not  want  him  dismissed  lest  the  Metho- 
dists should  be  offended.2  Bache,  the  postmaster 
at  Philadelphia,  was  a  defaulter.  McLean  had 
known  it  for  eighteen  months.  Finally  he  removed 
Bache,  and  appointed  Thomas  Sergeant,  who  had 
been  allied  with  Ingham,  Dallas,  and  other  Jackson 
men.  Adams  would  not  remove  McLean.3 

1  Levi  Woodbury  was  especially  shocked  at  this.    Plumera 
Plumer,  513. 

2  7  Adams,  540.  8  8  Adams,  8,  25, 51. 


THE  VOTE  IN  1828  147 

In  October,  just  before  the  election,  but  too 
short  a  time  before  it  to  have  any  effect  on  it, 
Adams  became  involved  in  a  controversy  with 
William  B.  Giles  about  the  circumstances  and 
motives  of  his  (Adams's)  going  over  to  the  ad- 
ministration in  1807.  On  account  of  revelations 
which  were  made  in  this  controversy,  Adams  was 
involved  in  another  with  the  descendants  of  the 
old  high  federalists,  who  called  him  to  account  for 
allegations  that  the  federalists  of  1803-1809  were 
secessionists.  The  controversy  developed  all  the 
acrimony  of  the  old  quarrel  between  the  Adamses 
and  the  high  federalists.  John  Quincy  Adams 
prepared  a  full  statement  of  the  facts  on  which  he 
based  his  opinions  and  statements,  but  it  was  not 
published  until  1877.1 

Lewis  wrote  to  Hayward  of  Cincinnati,  March 
28,  1827,  urging  that  the  Clinton  men  should  take 
sides,  as  the  Calhoun  men  had  done,  which  "  will 
give  them  equally  as  strong  claims  on  the  friends 
of  Gen.  Jackson,  but  unless  they  do  this  they  have 
no  right  to  expect  the  support  of  his  friends,  unless 
it  be  from  motives  of  Patriotism  alone."  "  Their 
silence  heretofore  has  subjected  them  to  the  im- 
putation of  a  want  of  candor.  They  ought  to  know 
that  if  the  schemes  of  Adams,  Clay  and  Webster 
are  carried  into  effect ;  that  he  [Clinton]  never 
can  be  President.  If  Old  Hickory  shall  be  elected 
he  will  set  a  better  example  —  it  is  not  my  opinion 

1  Neiv  England  Federalism,  by  Henry  Adams.    See  also  Plu« 
jner'a  Plumer,  and  Lodge's  Cabot. 


148  ANDREW  JACKSON 

he  could  be  induced  to  serve  more  than  one  term." l 
In  September,  the  Tammany  General  Committee 
and  the  Albany  "  Argus  "  came  out  for  Jackson,2 
as  it  had  been  determined,  in  the  programme,  that 
they  should  do.  A  law  was  passed  for  casting 
the  vote  of  New  York  in  1828  by  districts.  The 
days  of  voting  throughout  the  country  ranged 
from  October  31st  to  November  19th.3  The  votes 
were  cast  by  the  Legislature  in  Delaware  and 
South  Carolina ;  by  districts  in  Maine,  New  York, 
Maryland,  Tennessee ;  elsewhere,  by  general  ticket. 
Jackson  got  178  votes  to  83  for  Adams.  The 
popular  vote  was  648,273  for  Jackson;  508,064 
for  Adams.4  Jackson  got  only  one  vote  in  New 
England,  namely,  in  a  district  of  Maine,  where  the 
vote  was,  Jackson,  4,223;  Adams,  4,028.5  New 
York  gave  Jackson  20 ;  Adams,  16.  New  Jersey 
and  Delaware  voted  for  Adams.  Maryland  gave 
him  6,  and  Jackson  5.  Adams  got  not  a  single 
vote  south  of  the  Potomac  or  west  of  the  Alle- 
ghanies.  In  Georgia  no  Adams  ticket  was  nomi- 
nated.6 Tennessee  gave  Jackson  44,293  votes,  and 
Adams  2,240.  Parton  has  a  story  of  an  attempt, 
in  a  Tennessee  village,  to  tar  and  feather  two  men 
who  dared  to  vote  for  Adams.7  Pennsylvania  gave 
Jackson  101,652  votes ;  Adams,  50,848.  For  Vice- 

1  Copy  in  Ford  MSS.  2  2  Hammond,  258. 

8  Telegraph  Extra,  565. 

4  3  Ann.  Reg.  31.    The  figures  for  the  popular  vote  vary  in 
different  authorities. 
6  35  Niles,  177.  6  See  page  228.  7  3  Parton,  151. 


THE  VOTE   IN   1828  149 

President,  Richard  Rush  got  all  the  Adams  votes ; 
Calhoun  got  all  the  Jackson  votes  except  7  of 
Georgia,  which  were  given  to  William  Smith,  of 
South  Carolina. 

General  Jackson  was  therefore  triumphantly 
elected  President  of  the  United  States,  in  the  name 
of  reform,  and  as  the  standard-bearer  of  the  people, 
rising  in  their  might  to  overthrow  an  extrava- 
gant, corrupt,  aristocratic,  federalist  administration, 
which  had  encroached  on  the  liberties  of  the  people, 
and  had  aimed  to  corrupt  elections  by  an  abuse 
of  federal  patronage.  Many  people  believed  this 
picture  of  Adams's  administration  to  be  true.  An- 
drew Jackson  no  doubt  believed  it.  Many  people 
believe  it  yet.  Perhaps  no  administration,  except 
that  of  the  elder  Adams,  is  under  such  odium. 
There  is  not,  however,  in  our  history  any  adminis- 
tration which,  upon  a  severe  and  impartial  scrutiny, 
appears  more  worthy  of  respectful  and  honorable 
memory.1  Its  chief  fault  was  that  it  was  too  good 
for  the  wicked  world  in  which  it  found  itself.  In 
1836  Adams  said,  in  the  House,  that  he  had  never 
removed  one  person  from  office  for  political  causes, 
and  that  he  thought  that  was  one  of  the  principal 
reasons  why  he  was  not  reflected.2  The  "Annual 
Register"3  aptly  quoted,  in  regard  to  Adams,  a 
remark  of  Burke  on  Lord  Chatham :  "  For  a  wise 
man  he  seemed  to  me,  at  that  time,  to  be  governed 
too  much  by  general  maxims.  In  consequence  of 

1  See  Morse's  /.  Q.  Adams.  2  50  Niles,  194. 

8  3  Ann.  Beg.  34. 


150  ANDREW  JACKSON 

having  put  so  much  the  larger  part  of  his  oppcsers 
into  power,  his  own  principles  could  not  have  any 
effect  or  influence  hi  the  conduct  of  affairs.  When 
he  had  executed  his  plan  he  had  not  an  inch  of 
ground  to  stand  upon.  When  he  had  accomplished 
his  scheme  of  administration,  he  was  no  longer  a 
minister." 


CHAPTER  VI 
THE  "RELIEF"  SYSTEM  OF  KENTUCKY 

BEFORE  entering  upon  the  history  of  Jackson's 
administration  it  is  necessary  to  notice  a  piece  of 
local  history,  to  which  frequent  subsequent  refer- 
ence must  be  made,  on  account  of  influences  ex- 
erted on  national  politics.  A  great  abuse  of  paper 
money  and  banking  took  place  in  the  Mississippi 
Valley  between  1818  and  1828.  It  was  an  out- 
come of  the  application  of  political  forces  to  the 
relations  of  debtor  and  creditor.  It  necessarily  fol- 
lowed that  political  measures  were  brought  into 
collision  with  constitoitional  provisions,  and  with 
judicial  institutions  as  the  interpreters  and  admin- 
istrators of  the  same,  in  such  points  as  the  public 
credit,  the  security  of  contracts,  the  sanctity  of 
vested  rights,  the  independence  of  the  judiciary, 
and  its  power  to  pass  on  the  constitutionality  of 
laws.  A  struggle  also  arose  between  squatterism 
and  law  in  respect  to  land  titles,  which  involved 
the  same  fundamental  interests  and  issues  of  civil 
liberty  and  civilization.  Currency,  banks,  land 
titles,  stay  laws,  judge-breaking,  disunion,  and  the 
authority  of  the  federal  judiciary,  were  the  matters 
at  stake,  and  all  were  combined  and  reacting  on 


152  ANDREW  JACKSON 

each  other.  Kentucky  was  the  scene  of  the  strong. 
est  and  longest  conflict  between  the  constitutional 
guarantees  of  vested  rights  and  the  legislative  mea- 
sures for  relieving  persons  from  contract  obliga- 
tions, when  the  hopes  under  which  those  obligations 
were  undertaken  had  been  disappointed  by  actual 
experience.  It  was  from  Kentucky,  also,  that  the 
influences  arose  which  were  brought  to  bear  on 
national  politics. 

It  is  worth  while  to  see  what  historical  antece- 
dents had  educated  the  people  of  Kentucky  up  to 
the  extravagant  opinions  and  conduct  of  1820-30. 

The  sources  of  the  trouble  lie  far  back  in  the 
colonial  history  of  Virginia  and  North  Carolina, 
where  false  and  evil  traditions  were  started  which, 
when  carried  to  Kentucky  and  Tennessee,  produced 
more  gross  and  extravagant  consequences.  There 
had  been  excessive  speculation  in  all  the  colonies, 
and  all  had  imitated  more  or  less  the  action  of 
Massachusetts,  in  1640,  when  a  crisis  produced  ruin 
to  indebted  speculators,  and  when  it  was  ordered 
that  goods  taken  on  execution  should  be  transferred 
to  the  creditor  at  a  valuation  put  on  them  by  three 
neighbors  as  appraisers.1  There  was  some  justifi- 
cation for  such  a  law  when  there  was  no  market,  so 
that  goods  offered  at  auction  were  harshly  sacri- 
ficed. Appraisement  laws,  however,  in  a  commu- 
nity where  all  were  indebted,  and  where  each  in 
turn  became  appraiser  for  his  neighbors,  were  a 
gross  abuse  of  the  forms  of  law. 
i  Felt,  23. 


THE  "RELIEF"  SYSTEM  OF  KENTUCKY    153 

A  case  of  judge-breaking,  in  connection  with  a 
disputed  land-title  (due  to  the  slovenly  land  system 
of  Virginia),  occurred,  in  Kentucky,  in  1795. l  An 
attempt  had  been  made,  by  the  State,  to  quiet 
titles,  and  to  give  security  to  landholders,  by  ap- 
pointing commissioners,  who  gave  certificates  to 
possessors.  Very  many  of  the  latter  were  squat, 
ters,  and  paper  titles  were  extant  which  underlay 
their  claims.  The  Court  of  Appeals  of  the  State 
would  not  allow  the  certificates  to  preclude  an  exam- 
ination of  a  claim  and  an  award  of  justice,  as  the 
law  and  the  facts  might  require.  In  this  it  aroused 
the  rage  of  the  squatter  element.  Two  judges, 
Muter  and  Sebastian,  made  the  decision  ;  Wallace 
dissenting.  At  the  next  session  of  the  Legislature 
an  attempt  was  made  to  remove  the  two  judges 
by  an  address  to  the  Governor,  but  there  were 
only  three  majority  for  it  in  the  House,  while  two 
thirds  were  required.  The  House  then  summoned 
the  two  judges  before  it,  but  they  refused  to 
appear  on  grounds  of  the  independence  of  the  judi- 
ciary. The  House  passed  resolutions  denouncing 
the  judgment  and  impugning  the  integrity  or  men- 
tal capacity  of  the  judges.  The  Senate,  by  a  ma- 
jority of  one,  passed  similar  resolutions.  At  the 
next  term,  Muter  joined  Wallace  in  reversing  the 
decision  and  ordering  a  new  trial.  There  was  a 
new  appeal  and  affirmation  of  the  second  decision.3 

A  system  of  selling  State  lands  on  credit  began 

1  McConnell  vs.  Kenton,  Hughes's  Ky.  Rep.  257. 

2  Butler,  252. 


154  ANDREW  JACKSON 

in  1797,  which  had  a  very  unfortunate  effect  in  cre- 
ating a  body  of  debtors  to  the  State.  For  fifteen 
years  law  upon  law  was  passed,  fluctuating  between 
the  motive  of  collecting  what  was  due  to  the  State, 
and  that  of  showing  leniency  to  the  debtor.  Innu- 
merable acts  of  grace  to  individuals  were  passed. 

It  was  another  peculiarity  of  Kentucky  legisla- 
tion that  the  judiciary  system  of  the  State  was 
changed  again  and  again,  and  also  that  numerous 
acts  were  passed  in  relief  of  negligent  and  delin- 
quent officers. 

Judge  Muter  experienced  in  his  own  person  the 
hardship  of  life  in  a  community  which  does  not 
respect  vested  rights.  He  was  retired,  in  1806,  on 
an  old  age  pension  of  $300,  but  pensions  were  un- 
popular, and  his  was  repealed  in  1809,  in  spite  of 
the  Governor's  veto. 

Another  incident  which  contributes  to  the  same 
manifestation  of  the  popular  temper  was  a  law  of 
1808,  that  u  all  reports "  of  decisions  in  England 
since  July  4,  1776,  "shall  not  be  read  nor  con- 
sidered as  authority  in  any  of  the  courts  of  this 
commonwealth."  The  lawyers  held  that  no  one 
could  violate  this  except  by  reading  all  the  re- 
ports, etc. ;  but  the  decisions,  although  cited,  were 
not  read  in  court.1  This  State  also  tried  the  pop- 
ular whim  of  lay  judges. 

During  the  period  of  inflation  east  of  the 
Alleghanies  (1812-15),2  the  States  west  of  the 
Alleghanies  had  plenty  of  silver,  and  were  free  from 
1  Littell's  Rep.  Pref.  2  See  page  268. 


BANK  MANIA  153 

financial  disturbance.  At  the  session  of  1817-18, 
the  Legislature  of  Kentucky  plunged  that  State 
into  the  inflation  system  by  chartering  forty  banks, 
which  were  to  issue  notes  redeemable  in  Bank  of 
Kentucky  notes.1  The  popular  party  was  now  un- 
der the  dominion  of  a  mania  for  banks,  as  the 
institutions  for  making  the  poor  rich.  Clamorous 
demands  were,  at  the  same  time,  made  for  a  share 
in  the  blessings  which  the  Bank  of  the  United 
States  was  to  shower  over  the  country,  and  two 
branches  were  established,  one  at  Lexington  and 
one  at  Louisville.  Prices  immediately  began  to 
rise ;  specie  was  exported ;  contracts  were  entered 
into,  in  the  expectation  of  a  constant  advance  of 
the  "  wave  of  prosperity."  All  hastened  to  get  into 
debt,  because  to  do  so  was  not  only  the  way  to  get 
rich,  but  the  only  way  to  save  one's  self  from  ruin. 
In  June,  1819,  it  is  reported  :  "  The  whole  State  is 
in  considerable  commotion.  The  gross  amount  of 
debts  due  the  banks  is  estimated  at  ten  millions 
of  dollars.  .  .  .  Several  county  meetings  have  been 
held.  Their  purpose  is :  (1)  a  suspension  of  specie 
payments  ;  (2)  more  paper  money ;  (3)  an  extra 
session  of  the  Legislature  to  pass  some  laws  on 
this  emergency.  What  did  we  tell  the  people  of 
Kentucky  when  they  littered  their  banks  ?  "  2 
In  1819  the  banks  of  Tennessee  and  Kentucky 

1  The  Bank  of  Kentucky  was  founded  in  1806,  with  capital 
$1,000,000,  half   contributed   by  the   State;   to   beg-in   business 
when  $20,000  were  subscribed.     Sumner ;  Hist,  of  Banking  in  the 
U.  &,  59. 

2  16  Niles,  261. 


156  ANDREW  JACKSON 

and  nearly  all  in  Ohio  suspended  specie  payments.1 
The  bubble  had  now  exploded.  Liquidation  was 
inevitable,  and  the  indebted  speculators  were 
ruined.  Then  came  the  outcry  for  relief,  that  is, 
for  some  legislative  measures  which  would,  as  they 
thought,  make  the  bubble  mount  again  long  enough 
for  them  to  escape,  or  suspend  the  remedies  of 
creditors  so  that  liquidation  might  be  avoided. 
The  local  banks  generally  ascribed  their  ruin  to 
the  Bank  of  the  United  States.  They  over-issued 
their  notes,  which  accumulated  in  the  branch  of 
the  Bank,  that  being  the  strongest  holder.  These 
notes  were  presented  for  redemption.  The  local 
banks  construed  that  as  "  oppression,"  and  eagerly 
warded  off  all  responsibility  from  themselves  by 
representing  themselves  as  the  victims  of  an  alien 
monster,  which  crushed  them  while  they  were  try- 
ing to  confer  blessings  on  the  people  about  them. 
The  big  Bank  was  bad  enough,  but  the  plea  of  the 
local  banks  was  ingeniously  false.  It  availed,  how- 
ever, to  turn  the  popular  indignation  altogether 
against  the  Bank  of  the  United  States. 

July  26, 1820,  the  Bank  of  Tennessee  was  estab- 
lished, to  last  until  1843,  with  a  branch  at  Knox- 
vilte.  Its  amount  of  issue  was  $  1,000,000.  Its  notes 
were  to  be  loaned  on  mortgage  security  under  an 
apportionment  between  the  counties,  according  to 
the  taxable  property  in  1819.2  There  was  already 

1  On  the  history  of  the  banks  of  the  whole  Mississippi  Vallej 
»t  this  time  see  Sumner  ;  Hist.  Banking  in  U.  S. 

2  ISNiles,  452;  Gouge,  39. 


BANK  MANIA  157 

a  Bank  of  Tennessee,  which  would  have  nothing 
to  do  with  the  new  "  bank."  The  Legislature  of 
Tennessee  also  passed  a  law  that  both  real  and 
personal  property,  sold  under  execution,  should  be 
redeemable  within  two  years  by  paying  the  pur- 
chaser ten  per  cent  advance.  Jackson  was  a  pro- 
minent and  energetic  opponent  of  the  relief  system.1 
While  the  bill  for  the  above  bank  was  pending  he 
wrote  to  Lewis  as  follows  :  — 

"  Have  you  seen  the  Bill  now  before  the  Legislature 
of  our  state  to  establish  a  loan  office  —  If  you  have, 
permit  me  to  ask,  have  you  ever  seen  as  wicked  & 
pernicious  a  thing  attempted  by  a  set  of  honest  Legisla- 
tures acting  under  the  santity  of  an  oath  —  and  such  a 
palbable  infringement  of  both  the  federal  &  state  con- 
stitutions —  If  you  have  I  would  thank  you  to  tell  me 
when  and  where.  I  did  not  believe  that  corruption  & 
wickedness  had  obtained  such  an  ascendancy  in  the  mind 
of  any  man,  to  originate  such  a  bill  and  still  much  less, 
that  a  majority  of  the  Legislature  would  be  imposed 
upon  by  false  colouring  &  false  reasoning  to  pass  such  a 
Bill  —  but  I  have  been  mistaken,  it  has  passed  to  a  third 
reading  &  will  pass  into  a  law  unless  stopped  in  its 
Carreer  by  the  voice  of  the  people  —  I  learn  to  day 
that  a  meeting  will  be  in  the  lower  end  of  Sumner  & 
one  in  the  lower  end  of  Wilson  &  one  at  Mr  Sanders 
store  in  Davidson  this  day  to  remonstrate  against  it 
the  people  are  unanimous  I  am  told  on  this  subject  — 
They  find  it  a  desperate  &  wicked  project  in  its  details 
&  one  which  strikes  at  the  vital  principles  of  the  charter 
of  their  liberties,  and  their  dearest  rights  &  are  all  alive 

1  Sumner ;  Hist.  Banking,  148. 


158  ANDREW  JACKSON 

upon  the  subject,  and  I  expect  will  be  unanimous  in 
their  remonstrance  against  it,  as  no  good  can  grow  out 
of  it  &  much  evil —  I  do  hope  that  the  good  people  of 
Nashvill  will  unite  in  their  hearty  remonstrance  against 
it,  &  that  they  will  be  aided  by  the  grand  Jury  early 
next  week :  if  early  in  the  week  ;  it  will  stop  the  evil  of 
the  passage  of  the  law,  or  be  a  sure  pledge  that  it  will 
be  repealed  next  session. 

"  I  hope  you  and  Mr  Derby  will  not  sit  silent  &  let 
such  a  wicked  —  profligate  &  unconstitutional  law  pass 
without  your  exertions  to  prevent  it  —  a  law  that  will 
disgrace  the  state,  destroy  all  credit  abroad,  and  all 
confidence  at  home  —  I  will  endeavour  to  send  you  on 
Sunday  a  copy  of  the  resolutions  [illegible]  tomorrow  — 
I  trust  they  will  be  such  that  you  &  all  honest  men  will 
approve —  answer  this  by  the  bearer."  * 

This  letter  was  indorsed  on  the  back  by  Lewis : 
"Mr.  Grundy  was  the  originator  of  the  wicked 
and  corrupt  measure  referred  to  by  the  General  in 
this  letter."  This  accounts  to  some  extent  for  Jack- 
son's active  opposition  to  the  measure. 

Lewis  reminded  Jackson,  in  1839,  that  they  had 
always  differed  on  "financial  matters,"  and  re- 
ferred to  the  following  letter,  written  in  answer  to 
the  one  just  quoted,  in  proof :  — 

"  I  have  both  seen,  and  read  with  attention,  the  law, 
or  Bill,  now  before  the  Legislature,  authorising  the 
establishment  of  a  Loan  Office ;  and  altho  I  think  it  a 
dangerous  experiment,  and  that  by  passing  it  we  will  be 
hazarding  much,  yet  I  hope  and  am  inclined  to  think,  it 
mil  not  be  fraught  with  such  consequences  as  your  lively 

i  Ford  MSS. 


BANK  MANIA  159 

interest  for  the  prosperity  of  the  State,  have  induced 
you  to  believe.  .  .  .  The  members  of  the  Legislature,  I 
am  told,  and  particularly  some  of  your  warmest  friends, 
think  your  remarks  about  them,  when  in  Murfresborough, 
were  very  harsh.  Members  of  Assembly,  acting  under 
the  sanctity  of  an  oath  do  not  like  to  be  told  that  by 
voting  for  certain  measures  they  have  been  guilty  of 
perjury.  Such  harshness,  my  dear  General,  is  calculated 
to  do  yourself  an  injury  without  producing  the  desired 
good.  Mildness  universally  has  a  much  more  salutary 
effect;  it  often  convinces  the  understanding  without 
wounding  the  feelings.  Your  enemies  will,  and  are  al- 
ready giving  a  high  colouring  to  the  observations  you 
made  in  Murfresboro'.  the  other  day." 

Fifteen  months  later  Jackson  wrote  from  Florida : 
"I  regret  the  scenes  that  you  relate,  you  may  rest 
assured  it  has  greatly  injured  the  reputation  of  the 
State,  and  I  have  no  doubt  will  have  a  tendency  to  open 
the  eyes  of  the  sober  virtuous  part  of  the  community,  to 
the  proflegate  conduct  of  a  party  in  Tennessee  whose 
conduct  has  destroyed  its  character  and  its  best  interests, 
your  paper  here  is  not  worth  ^^  to  the  dollar  and  this 
depreciation  falls  upon  the  labourers —  There  is  no 
county  that  can  stand  this  long  —  and  I  expect  if  the 
assembly  can  be  swayed  by  Mr  Grandy  the  governor,  & 
party,  that  we  will  have  a  few  more  million  of  raggs  — 
as  I  do  not  mean  to  have  much  to  do  with  this  ragg 
business,  I  console  myself  with  the  prayer  "May  the 
lords  will  be  done."  " 

In  June,  1821,  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Ten- 
nessee pronounced  the  relief  system  of  that  State 
unconstitutional,  and  it  came  to  an  end. 


160  ANDREW  JACKSON 

The  forty  banks  and  the  two  branches  of  the 
Bank  of  the  United  States,  in  Kentucky,  went 
into  operation  in  1817.  The  Bank  of  Kentucky 
could  not  therefore  sustain  its  former  circulation. 
It  imported  $240,000  in  silver,  and  reduced  its 
circulation,  November,  1818,  to  1195,000.  Never- 
theless, it  fell  heavily  in  debt  during  1818  and 
1819  to  the  branches  of  the  Bank  of  the  United 
States.1  In  November,  1819,  the  latter  bank  or- 
dered the  debt  to  be  collected.  The  Bank  of 
Kentucky  suspended  and  compromised.  Its  notes 
were  at  fifteen  per  cent  discount.  A  great  reduc- 
tion of  the  paper  was  forced,  because  the  Bank  of 
the  United  States  came  in  to  demand  payment- 
May  4,  1820,  the  stockholders  of  the  Bank  of 
Kentucky  voted  to  suspend  specie  payments.  This 
suspension  became  permanent.  Intense  rage  was 
excited  against  the  Bank  of  the  United  States. 
Kentucky  had  laid  a  tax  of  160,000  on  each  of 
the  branches  of  the  national  Bank,  in  January, 
1819.  At  the  same  time  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States  declared  the  Bank  constitu- 
tional.2 In  December  the  Kentucky  Court  of  Ap- 
peals unanimously  sustained  the  State  tax,  on  the 
ground  that  the  Bank  was  unconstitutional.  Two 
judges  thought  that  they  must  yield  to  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  United  States.  The  third, 
Rowan,  thought  that  they  ought  to  stand  out  and 
force  further  trial  in  the  interest  of  State  rights.3 

1  Kendall's  Autobiography,  203.  2  See  page  166. 

8  Kendall's  Autobiography,  205. 


FORCED  LIQUIDATION  161 

December  15, 1819,  the  Legislature  of  Kentucky 
passed,  over  a  veto,  a  law1  to  suspend  for  sixty 
days  sales  under  executions,  if  the  defendant  gave 
bonds  that  the  goods  levied  on  should  be  forth- 
coming at  the  end  of  that  time.  The  Bank  of 
the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky  was  established 
November  29,  1820,  as  a  further  "  relief  "  measure 
for  the  benefit  of  the  debtors,  victims  of  the  forty 
banks  of  1817.  As  a  further  measure  of  relief  a 
replevin  law  was  passed,  December  25,  1820,  ac- 
cording to  which  the  debtor  was  to  have  two  years 
in  which  to  redeem,  under  an  execution,  unless  the 
creditor  should  endorse  on  the  note  that  he  would 
take  notes  of  the  Bank  of  the  Commonwealth,  if 
the  debtor  could  pay  them.  Another  act  was 
passed,  December  21,  1821,  which  forbade  the  sale 
of  land  on  execution,  unless  it  should  bring  three 
fourths  of  its  value  as  appraised  by  a  jury  of  neigh- 
bors. The  Bank  of  the  Commonwealth  was  au- 
thorized to  issue  notes  for  three  millions  of  dollars. 
It  had  no  stockholders.  The  president  and  direc- 
tors were  elected  annually  by  the  Legislature. 
Their  salaries  were  paid  by  the  State.  They  were 
incorporated.  The  notes  were  issued  in  loans  on 
mortgage  security,  and  were  apportioned  between 
the  counties  in  proportion  to  the  taxable  property 
in  each  in  1820.  Loans  were  to  be  made,  in  1820, 
only  to  those  who  needed  them,  "  for  the  purpose 
of  paying  his,  her,  or  their  just  debts,"  or  to  pur- 
chase the  products  of  the  country  for  exportation. 

1  Kendall's  Autobiography,  227. 


162  ANDREW  JACKSON 

The  bank  had  twelve  branches.  Its  funds  were  to 
be :  (1)  all  money  thereafter  paid  in  for  land  war- 
rants, or  for  land  west  of  the  Tennessee  river ;  (2) 
the  produce  of  the  stock  owned  by  the  State  in 
the  Bank  of  Kentucky,  after  that  bank  should  be 
wound  up;  (3)  the  unexpended  balances  in  the 
treasury  at  the  end  of  the  year.  The  profits  of 
the  bank  were  to  go  to  the  State.  Stripped  of  all 
pretence,  therefore,  the  bank  was  the  State  trea- 
sury, put  into  the  hands  of  a  commission  elected 
by  the  Legislature,  and  incorporated.  Its  funds 
were  the  current  receipts  of  the  treasury  from  land, 
and  its  current  balance,  if  it  had  one;  also  the 
capital  already  invested  in  the  old  bank,  whenever 
that  should  be  released,  which  never  was  done. 
The  notes  of  the  bank  were  legal  tender  to  and 
from  the  State.  The  Legislature  appropriated 
$7,000  to  buy  books,  paper,  and  plates  for  printing 
the  notes.  This  is  all  the  real  capital  the  bank 
ever  had.  It  was,  therefore,  just  one  of  the  grand 
swindling  concerns  common  at  that  period,  so  many 
of  which  are  described  in  the  pages  of  Niles  and 
Gouge.1 

In  1822  Judge  Clark,  of  the  Circuit  Court  of 
Kentucky,  declared  the  replevin  law  of  that  State 
unconstitutional.2  He  was  cited  before  the  House 
•*f  Eepresentatives  of  the  State,  and  an  effort  was 

1  46  Niles,  211. 

2  23  Niles,  Supp.  153  (supplement  to  the  22d  vol.).   The  judge's 
decision,  the  legislative  proceedings,  and  the  judge's  defence  are 
there  given. 


JUDGE-BREAKING  163 

made  to  have  him  removed  by  the  Governor  on 
the  resolution  of  the  Legislature.  The  vote  was 
59  to  35  ;  not  two  thirds,  as  required  by  the  Con- 
stitution for  this  method  of  removal.  In  this  year 
the  Legislature  used  its  power  in  the  election  of 
directors  of  the  old  Bank  of  Kentucky  to  put  in 
"  relief "  men  who  would  make  that  bank  accept 
Commonwealth  notes.  The  effect  was  that  the 
stock  of  the  old  bank  at  once  fell  to  fifty,  and  it 
suspended.1  In  October,  1822,  a  specie  dollar  was 
worth  $2.05  in  Commonwealth  notes.2  A  Ken- 
tucky correspondent  writes,  February,  1823  :  The 
Bank  of  the  Commonwealth  "  has  nearly  destroyed 
all  commerce  or  trade,  extinguished  personal  credit, 
and  broken  down  confidence  between  man  and  man, 
as  well  as  damped  and  depressed  the  industry 
of  the  State ;  but  the  people  are  beginning  to 
get  tired  of  its  blessings,  and  its  paper-mill  will 
soon  cease  working,  leaving  a  debt,  however, 
due  to  it  from  the  poorest  of  the  people  to  the 
amount  of  two  and  a  half  or  three  millions  of  dol- 
lars." 3 

In  1823  the  notes  of  the  Bank  of  the  Common- 
wealth began  to  be  withdrawn  and  burned.  Gov- 
ernor Adair,  in  his  message  of  that  year,  approved 
of  the  relief  system,  and  denounced  the  courts  for 
deciding  the  replevin  laws  unconstitutional.  This 
proceeding  of  the  courts  seerns  to  have  been  then 

l  Collins,  89.  2  23  Niles,  96. 

8  23  Niles,  337.  Kendall  justly  described  the  relief  system  in 
1821.  Autobiography,  246. 


164  ANDREW   JACKSON 

regarded  very  generally  by  the  people  of  Kentucky 
as  a  usurpation  by  the  judges,  and  an  assault  on 
the  liberties  of  the  people.  After  Adair's  terra 
expired,  he  petitioned  for  redress,  on  account  of 
the  payment  of  his  salary  in  depreciated  paper. 

In  1823  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Kentucky  de- 
clared the  relief  laws  unconstitutional.  The  Leg- 
islature, in  January,  1824,  affirmed  the  constitu- 
tionality of  said  laws,  and  an  issue  was  made  up 
on  the  right  and  power  of  courts  to  annul,  on  the 
ground  of  unconstitutionality,  laws  passed  by  the 
representatives  of  the  people.  The  relief  system 
thus  brought  directly  to  the  test  the  power  of  a  sys- 
tem of  constitutional  guarantees,  administered  by  an 
independent  judiciary,  to  protect  rights  against  an 
interested  and  corrupt  majority  of  debtors,  which 
was  using  its  power,  under  democratic-republican 
self-government,  to  rob  the  minority  of  creditors. 
The  State  election  of  1824  was  fought  on  the  effort 
to  elect  a  Legislature,  two  thirds  of  which  would 
memorialize  the  Governor  for  the  removal  of  the 
judges  who  had  decided  the  relief  laws  unconstitu- 
tional. A  majority  was  obtained,  but  not  two 
thirds.  Another  course  was  then  taken.  The 
legislative  act  by  which  the  State  judiciary  was 
organized  and  the  Court  of  Appeals  created  was 
repealed.  Reference  was  made,  in  defence  of  this 
action,  to  the  repeal  of  the  federal  judiciary  act,  at 
the  beginning  of  Jefferson's  administration.1  A 
new  Court  of  Appeals  was  constituted  by  a  new 

1  Collins,  90. 


OLD  COURT  AND  NEW  COURT     165 

act.  William  T.  Barry  was  appointed  chief  jus- 
tice. The  old  court  denied  the  constitutionality  of 
the  repeal  and  of  the  new  court,  and  continued  its 
existence,  so  that  there  were  two  courts.  In  1825 
the  parties  in  the  State  were  "  Old  Court "  and 
"  New  Court." l  The  new  court  party  affirmed, 
sometimes  with  vehemence,  sometimes  with  so- 
lemnity, that  liberty  and  republicanism  were  at 
stake,  and  that  the  contest  was  to  see  whether  the 
judges  should  be  above  the  law.  The  old  court 
party  won  a  majority  in  the  lower  House.  The 
Senate,  which  held  over,  was  still  of  the  new 
court  party.  The  House  voted  to  abolish  the 
new  court,  but  the  Senate  did  not  agree.  By  this 
time  the  contest  had  developed  a  whole  school  of 
ambitious,  rising  politicians,  who  appealed  with 
demagogical  address  to  the  passions  and  distress 
of  the  embarrassed  debtors.  In  November,  1825, 
Niles  quotes  a  Kentucky  paper  that  more  persons 
had  left  that  State  than  had  come  to  it  for  many 
years.  It  is  plain  that  two  classes  of  persons  were 
driven  away  by  the  relief  system  :  (1)  those  who 
wanted,  by  steady  industry  and  accumulation  with- 
out borrowing,  to  acquire  capital  and  to  be  secure 
in  the  possession  of  it ;  and  (2)  those  who  could 
not,  under  the  prevailing  depression,  work  off  the 
mortgages  which  they  had  eagerly  given  to  the 
Bank  of  the  Commonwealth  for  its  notes,  in  the 
hope  of  thus  escaping  from  old  embarrassments. 
After  five  years  their  condition  was  hopeless,  and 
i  28  Niles,  277. 


166  ANDREW  JACKSON 

if  they  had  any  energy  they  started  westward  to 
begin  again. 

In  the  mean  time  there  had  been  a  number  of 
decisions  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  which  irritated  the  people  of  Kentucky,  and 
enhanced  their  alarm  about  the  assaults  of  the 
judiciary  on  liberty.  We  have  seen  how  the  local 
banks  used  the  Bank  of  the  United  States  as  a 
scapegoat  for  all  their  sins,  and  for  all  the  bad 
legislation  of  the  States.  The  next  swing  of  the 
pendulum  of  popular  feeling  was  over  into  hatred 
of  the  Bank  of  the  United  States.  Several  States, 
of  which  Kentucky  was  one,  tried  to  tax  the 
branches  out  of  existence.  In  McCulloch  vs. 
Maryland  (1819),1  and  in  Osborn  vs.  Bank  of  the 
United  States  (1824),2  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  declared  that  the  States  could  not 
tax  the  Bank.  In  Sturges  vs.  Crowninshield 
(1819),3  the  same  court  set  limits  to  the  State  in- 
solvent laws,  and  thereby  prevented  the  favor  to 
debtors,  which  the  embarrassed  States  desired  to 
provide.  K.  M.  Johnson,  of  Kentucky,  proposed 
an  amendment  to  the  Constitution,  January  14, 
1822,  giving  appellate  jurisdiction  to  the  Senate  in 
any  case  to  which  a  State  was  a  party,  arising 
under  the  laws,  treaties,  etc.,  of  the  United  States.4 
In  Bank  of  the  United  States  vs.  Halstead  (1825),5 
the  Supreme  Court  decided  that  it  had  jurisdiction 

1  4  Wheaton,  316.  2  9  Wheaton,  739. 

8  4  Wheaton,  122.  *  7  Benton's  Abridgment,  145. 

*  10  Wheaton,  51. 


ALLEGED  FEDERAL  ENCROACHMENTS    167 

in  suits  to  which  the  Bank  of  the  United  States 
was  a  party,  and  that  a  law  which  forbade  sales  of 
land  under  execution  for  less  than  three  fourths  of 
the  appraised  value  did  not  apply  to  writs  of  exe- 
cution issued  by  federal  courts.  The  question  of 
the  constitutionality  of  such  a  law  was  avoided. 
In  Wayman  vs.  Southard  (1825),1  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  decided  that  the  re- 
plevin and  endorsement  law  of  Kentucky  did  not 
apply  to  a  writ  of  execution  issued  from  a  federal 
court.  In  Bank  of  the  United  States  vs.  Plant- 
ers' Bank  of  Georgia  (1824),2  it  decided  that  if 
a  State  became  a  party  to  a  banking  or  com- 
mercial enterprise  the  State  could  be  sued  in  the 
course  of  the  business.  This  decision  seemed  to 
threaten  the  Bank  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky. In  Green  vs.  Biddle  (1823), 3  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  decided  that  the  laws 
of  Kentucky  of  1797  and  1812,  which  reduced 
the  liability  of  the  occupying  claimant  of  land  to 
the  successful  contestant,  on  account  of  rent  and 
profits,  as  compared  with  the  same  liability  under 
the  law  of  Virginia  at  the  time  of  the  separation, 
and  which  in  a  corresponding  manner  increased 
the  claims  of  the  occupying  claimant  for  improve- 
ments, were  null  and  void,  being  in  violation  of  the 
contract  between  Kentucky  and  Virginia  at  the 
time  of  separation.4  In  Bodley  vs.  Gaither  (1825), 

1  10  Wheaton,  1.          2  9  Wheaton,  904.          8  8  Wheaton,  1. 
4  Kentucky  sent   to  Congress,  May  3,  1824,  a  remonstrance 
against  this  decision.     Letcher,  of  Kentucky,  introduced  a  reso- 


168  ANDREW  JACKSON 

the  Supreme  Court  of  Kentucky  refused  to  be 
controlled  by  the  decision  in  Greene  vs.  Biddle.1 
Inasmuch  as  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States,  in  Hawkins  vs.  Barney's  Lessee  (1831), 2 
very  materially  modified  the  ruling  in  Greene  vs. 
Biddle,  the  Kentucky  States  rights  men  could 
claim,  as  they  did,  that  the  federal  court  had 
"  backed  down,"  and  that  they  were  right  all 
the  time.3  In  Dartmouth  College  vs.  Woodward 
(1819),4  the  Supreme  Court  had  decided  that  the 
charter  of  a  private  corporation  was  a  contract 
which  a  State  Legislature  must  not  violate,  and 
had  thus  put  certain  vested  rights  beyond  legisla- 
tive caprice.5 

Other  decisions  had  also  been  made,  bearing  on 
State  rights  and  the  powers  of  the  federal  judiciary 
in  a  more  general  way.  In  Martin  vs.  Hunter's 
Lessee  (181 6), 6  the  constitutionality  of  the  25th 
section  of  the  judiciary  act  (power  of  the  Supreme 
Conn,  to  pass  upon  the  constitutionality  of  State 
laws)  was  affirmed,  and  the  authority  of  the  court 
in  a  £ase  under  a  federal  treaty  was  maintained 
against  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia.  In  Gib- 
bons vs.  Ogden  (1824),7  the  court  overruled  the 
Supreme  Court  of  New  York,  and  declared  an  act 

lution  to  amend  the  law,  so  that  more  than  a  majority  of  judges 
should  be  necessary  to  declare  a  State  law  void.  8  Benton's 
Abridgment,  51. 

1  3  T.  B.  Monroe,  58.  2  5  Peters,  457. 

8  Butler,  279.  4  4  Wheaton,  518. 

5  1  Webster's  Correspondence,  283.  6  1  Wheaton,  304. 

7  9  Wheaton,  1. 


GROWTH  OF  CONSTITUTIONAL  LAW     169 

of  the  Legislature  giving  exclusive  privileges  in 
the  waters  of  New  York  unconstitutional  and  void. 
In  Cohens  vs.  Virginia  (1821), 1  it  was  decided  that, 
if  a  citizen  of  a  State  pleads  against  a  statute 
of  his  own  State  an  act  of  Congress  as  defence, 
the  25th  section  of  the  judiciary  act  gives  the  fed- 
eral Supreme  Court  jurisdiction  to  test  whether 
that  defence  be  good.  In  the  case  of  the  "  Mar- 
mion  "  (1823),  the  Attorney-General  of  the  United 
States  (Wirt)  had  rendered  an  opinion  2  (1824) 
that  a  law  of  South  Carolina  (1822),  according  to 
which  any  free  negro  sailors  who  should  come  into 
that  State  on  board  a  ship  should  be  imprisoned 
until  the  ship  sailed  again,  was  incompatible  with 
the  Constitution  and  with  the  international  obliga- 
tions of  the  United  States.  The  District  Court  of 
the  United  States  had  decided  (1823)  to  the  same 
effect.3 

From  our  present  standpoint  of  established  doc- 
trine on  the  points  of  constitutional  law  above 
enumerated,  it  is  difficult  to  understand  the  shocks 
which  many  or  all  of  these  decisions  gave  to  the 
Jeffersonian  school  of  politicians.  The  assertion 
that  the  reserved  rights  of  the  States  had  been  in- 
vaded 4  is  to  be  referred  to  these  judicial  decisions, 
not  to  executive  acts.  The  strict  construction,  State 
rights  school  felt  every  one  of  these  decisions  as  a 
blow  from  an  adversary  against  whom  there  was  no 

1  6  Wheaton,  264. 

2  1  Opinions  of  the  Attorneys-General,  659. 

8  25  Niles,  12.  *  See  page  13ft     • 


170  ANDREW  JACKSON 

striking  back,  and  the  fact  undoubtedly  is  that  the 
Supreme  Court,  under  the  lead  of  Marshall  and 
Story,  was  consolidating  the  federal  system,  and 
securing  it  against  fanciful  dogmas  and  exagger- 
ated theories  which  would  have  made  the  federal 
government  as  ridiculous  as  the  German  Bund. 
Readers  of  to-day  are  surprised  to  find  that  a  great 
many  people  were  alarmed  about  their  liberties 
under  the  mild  and  timid  rule  of  Monroe.1  It 
was,  however,  by  no  means  the  scholastic  hair- 
splitters  and  hobby-riders  in  constitutional  law 
alone  who  were  astonished  and  bewildered  by  the 
course  of  the  decisions.  It  needs  to  be  remem- 
bered that  the  system  of  the  Constitution,  even 
after  the  second  war,  was  yet,  to  a  great  degree,  un- 
established  and  unformed.  Actual  experience  of 
any  legislative  act  or  constitutional  provision  is 
needed  to  find  out  how  it  will  work,  and  what  inter- 
pretation its  terms  will  take  on  from  the  growth  of 
institutions  and  from  their  inter-action.  It  is  im- 
possible, upon  reading  a  constitutional  provision, 
to  figure  to  one's  self,  save  in  the  vaguest  way, 
what  will  be  the  character  and  working  of  the  in- 
stitution which  it  creates.  It  was  one  of  the  most 
fortunate  circumstances  in  the  history  of  the  United 
States  that  the  judicial  interpretation  and  admin- 
istration of  the  Constitution  was,  during  its  for- 
mative  period,  for  a  long  time  in  the  hands  of 
men  who  shaped  the  Constitution  in  fidelity  to  its 

1  See  Garland's  Randolph,  especially  II.  211,  on  Gibbons  vs. 
Ogden. 


DESHA'S  MESSAGE  OF  1825  171 

original  meaning  and  spirit,  to  secure  at  once 
dignity  and  strength  to  the  federal  system,  and 
constitutional  liberty  to  the  nation.  It  is  fortu- 
nate that  they  were  men  of  profound  legal  attain- 
ments and  historic  sense,  and  neither  abstractionists 
of  the  French  school,  nor  dialecticians  under  the 
State  rights  and  strict-construction  dogmas.  The 
history  of  the  country  has  proved  the  soundness 
and  wisdom  of  the  constitutional  principles  they 
established,  but  while  they  were  doing  this  they  had 
to  meet  with  a  great  deal  of  criticism  and  abuse. 
Kentucky  had  furnished  a  number  of  the  cases, 
and  at  least  two  important  interests  of  hers  (relief 
system  and  contested  land  titles)  had  been  decided 
adversely  to  the  interests  of  the  classes  which  had 
least  education  and  property,  and  most  votes. 

The  message  of  Governor  Desha  of  Kentucky, 
November  7, 1825,1  deserves  attentive  reading  from 
any  one  who  seeks  to  trace  the  movement  of  de- 
cisive forces  in  American  political  history.  The 
Governor  denounces  all  banks,  and  especially  the 
Bank  of  the  United  States,  because  they  are  all 
hostile  to  the  power  and  rights  of  the  States.  He 
says  that  the  Bank  of  the  United  States  has  been 
taken  under  the  protection  of  the  federal  Supreme 
Court,  and  that  these  two  foreign  powers,  so  allied, 
have  overthrown  the  sovereignty  of  Kentucky.  He 
complains  of  the  State  Court  of  Appeals,  which  had 
declared  the  law  taxing  the  Bank  of  the  United 
States  to  be  constitutional,  for  not  maintaining  its 
1  29  Niles,  219. 


172  ANDREW  JACKSON 

ground,  but  receding,  and  deferring  to  the  con- 
trary  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States.  He  congratulates  the  State,  however,  that 
the  abolition  of  the  old  court  has  removed  the 
compliant  head  from  the  State  judiciary,  and  that 
the  new  court  will  maintain  the  sovereignty  of 
the  State  against  federal  encroachments.  He  de- 
clares that  the  emigration  from  the  State  is  due  to 
the  decision  about  the  occupying  claimant  law.  He 
denounces  the  federal  courts  for  not  recognizing 
the  State  relief  laws  in  regard  to  writs  issued  by 
themselves,  and  he  regards  the  State  as  robbed  of 
self-government  by  this  intrusion  of  foreign  courts, 
which  bring  with  them  an  independent  code  of 
procedure.  He  defends  the  relief  system,  and 
although  he  does  not  distinctly  say  so,  what  he 
means  is  that  the  federal  courts,  by  their  intrusion, 
enable  foreign  creditors  to  escape  the  treatment 
which  Kentucky  creditors  have  to  submit  to  under 
the  laws  of  their  country.  This  was  the  invasion 
of  the  "sovereignty"  of  Kentucky  which  was  re- 
sented most. 

In  the  same  message,  Desha  suggested  that  the 
Legislature  should  abolish  both  the  Courts  of  Ap- 
peals, and  he  promised  that,  if  this  should  be  done, 
and  a  new  court  -should  be  established,  he  would 
select  the  judges  for  it  equally  from  the  two  ex- 
isting ones.  In  1826  the  State  election  was  again 
a  contest  between  old  court  and  new  court.  The 
old  court  carried  both  Houses.1  The  replevin  laws 

1  C»llins,  93. 


DESHA'S  MESSAGE  OF  1825  173 

were  repealed.  The  acts  of  the  new  court  were 
treated  as  null.  The  new  court  seized  the  records, 
and  held  them  by  military  force.  Civil  war  was 
avoided  only  by  the  moderation  of  the  old  court 
party.  The  Legislature  repealed  the  law  consti- 
tuting the  new  court,  but  the  Governor  vetoed  the 
repeal.1  It  was  passed  over  his  veto,  December 
30,  1826.  By  resignations  and  new  appointments 
among  the  judges,  the  court  was  reconstituted  as  a 
single  anti-relief  body  in  the  years  1828-29. 

In  1827  the  currency  of  the  States  in  the  Mis- 
sissippi Valley  was  fairly  good.  There  remained 
only  §800,000  of  Commonwealth  paper  out,  and 
this  was  merchandise,  not  currency.2  The  bank 
held  notes  of  individuals  to  the  amount  of  one  and 
a  half  millions,  and  real  estate  worth  $30,592. 
Hence  there  was  due  to  it  a  balance  from  the 
public,  after  all  its  notes  should  be  paid  in,  of 
$600,000.  Its  debtors  had  this  to  pay  in  specie 
or  its  equivalent,  or  else  the  bank  would  get  their 
property.  This  sum,  therefore,  fairly  represents 
the  net  final  swindle  which  the  relief  system  per- 
petrated on  its  dupes,  to  say  nothing  of  its  effects 
on  creditors  and  on  the  general  prosperity  of  the 
State.  The  bank  never  had  over  $7,000  capital 
even  spent  upon  it.  Its  total  issue  of  bits  of  paper 
was  printed  with  the  denomination  dollars  up  to 
three  millions.  By  this  issue  it  had  won  $600,000 
worth  of  real  property,  or  twenty  per  cent  in  five 
years.  Who  got  this  gain  ?  It  seems  that  there 
i  31  Niles,  310.  2  32  Niles,  37. 


174  ANDREW  JACKSON 

must  have  been  private  and  personal  interests  at 
stake  to  account  for  the  rage  which  was  excited  by 
the  decisions  which  touched  this  bank,  and  by  the 
intensity  of  friendship  for  it  which  was  manifested 
by  a  leading  political  clique.  Undoubtedly  the 
interest  was  that  of  the  clique  of  politicians  who 
got  lucrative  offices,  power,  and  influence  through 
the  bank.  Wherever  a  Bank  of  the  State  was  set 
up,  the  development  of  such  a  clique,  with  all  the 
attendant  corruptions  and  abuses,  took  place. 

In  1828  the  parties  were  still  relief  and  anti- 
relief,  the  former  for  Jackson,  the  latter  for  Ad- 
ams. The  ideas,  however,  had  changed  somewhat. 
A  "  relief  "  man,  in  1828,  meant  a  State  rights 
man  and  strict  construction ist,  who  wanted  to  put 
bounds  to  the  supposed  encroachments  of  the  fede- 
ral power,  especially  the  judiciary,  and  indeed  to 
the  constitutional  functions  of  the  judiciary  in 
general.  Metcalf,  the  anti-relief  candidate  for 
Governor,  in  1828,  defeated  Barry,  the  relief  can- 
didate, after  a  very  hard  fight,1  but  the  State  gave 
7,912  majority  for  Jackson. 

Two  later  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  may 
here  be  mentioned,  because  they  carried  forward 
the  same  constitutional  tendency  which  has  been 
described.  They  were  connected  with  the  political 
movements  which  have  been  mentioned,  and  with 
those  which  came  later. 

In  Bank  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky 
vs.  Wister  et  al.  (1829),2  it  was  held  that  the 
1  Collins,  93.  2  2  Peters,  318. 


OTHER  DECISIONS  175 

bank  must  pay  specie  on  demand  in  return  for  a 
deposit  which  had  been  made  with  it  of  its  own 
notes,  although  these  notes  were,  when  deposited, 
worth  only  fifty  cents  on  the  dollar.  It  had  been 
provided  in  the  act  establishing  the  bank  that  it 
should  pay  specie.  The  bank  tried  to  plead  the 
non-suability  of  a  State,  but  it  was  held  that,  if  the 
State  was  sole  owner  and  issued  as  a  sovereign,  it 
would  be  non-suable.  Then,  however,  the  notes 
would  be  bills  of  credit.  If  the  State  issued  as  a 
banker,  not  a  sovereign,  then  it  was  suable  under 
the  decision  in  the  case  of  the  Planter's  Bank  of 
Georgia.  In  Craig  vs.  Missouri  (1830),1  a  law  of 
Missouri  (1821)  establishing  loan  offices  to  loan 
State  currency  issues  on  mortgages  was  declared 
unconstitutional  as  to  the  notes  issued,  which  were 
bills  of  credit.  In  this  decision  bills  of  credit 
were  defined. 

1  4  Peters,  410. 


CHAPTER  VII 

INTERNAL    HISTORY   OF  JACKSON'S    FIRST    ADMIN- 
ISTRATION 

JACKSON  came  to  power  as  the  standard-bearer 
of  a  new  upheaval  of  democracy,  and  under  a  pro- 
fession of  new  and  fuller  realization  of  the  Jef- 
fersonian  democratic-republican  principles.  The 
causes  of  the  new  strength  of  democracy  were 
economic.  It  gained  strength  every  year.  Every- 
thing in  the  situation  of  the  country  favored  it. 
The  cotton  culture  advanced  with  great  rapidity, 
and  led  to  a  rapid  settlement  of  the  Southwestern 
States.  The  Ohio  States  filled  up  with  a  very 
strong  population.  Steamboats  came  into  common 
use,  and  they  had  a  value  for  this  country,  with 
its  poor  roads,  but  grand  rivers,  bays,  sounds,  and 
lakes,  such  as  they  had  for  no  other  country. 
Railroads  began  to  be  built  just  after  Jackson's 
election.  The  accumulation  of  capital  in  the  coun- 
try was  not  yet  great.  It  was  inadequate  for  the 
chances  which  were  offered  by  the  opening  up  of 
the  continent.  Hence  the  industrial  organization 
did  not  take  the  form  of  a  wages  organization. 
Individuals,  however,  found  the  chances  of  very 
free  and  independent  activity,  which  easily  pro- 


SOCIAL  NOTIONS  AND  CHANGES          177 

duced  a  simple  abundance.  The  conditions  were 
such  as  to  give  to  each  a  sense  of  room  and  power. 
Individual  energy  and  enterprise  were  greatly  fa- 
vored. Of  course,  the  effect  on  the  character  of 
the  people  was  certain.  They  became  bold,  inde- 
pendent, energetic,  and  enterprising.  They  were 
versatile,  and  adapted  themselves  easily  to  circum- 
stances. They  were  not  disturbed  in  an  emer- 
gency; and  they  were  shrewd  in  dealing  with 
difficulties  of  every  kind.  The  State  constitutions 
became  more  and  more  purely  democratic,  under 
the  influence  of  this  character  of  the  people.  So- 
cial usages  threw  off  all  the  forms  which  had  been 
inherited  from  colonial  days.  The  tone  of  mind 
was  developed  which  now  marks  the  true,  unspoiled 
American,  as  distinguished  from  all  Europeans, 
although  it  has  scarcely  been  noticed  by  the  critics 
who  have  compared  the  two  ;  namely,  the  tone  of 
mind  which  has  no  understanding  at  all  of  the  no- 
tion that  A  could  demean  himself  by  talking  to  B, 
or  that  B  could  be  raised  in  his  own  estimation  or 
that  of  other  people  by  being  spoken  to  by  A,  no 
matter  who  A  and  B  might  be.  Ceremonies,  titles, 
forms  of  courtesy  and  etiquette,  were  distasteful. 
Niles  did  not  like  it  that  members  of  Congress 
were  called  "honorable."1  He  criticised  diplo- 
matic usages.  He  devoted  a  paragraph  to  denun- 
ciation of  a  fashionable  marriage  in  Boston,  which 
took  place  in  King's  (!)  Chapel,  and  at  which  the 
people  cheered  the  groom.  He  objected  to  the 
i  37  NUes,  378. 


178  ANDREW  JACKSON 

term  "  cabinet,"  l  and  said,  very  truly,  that  there  is 
no  cabinet  in  our  system.  Pie  was  displeased  by 
public  honors  to  the  President  (Monroe).  As  to 
republic,  democracy,  aristocracy,  the  "  people,"  and 
other  political  "  symbols,"  as  we  call  them  nowa- 
days, he  held  all  the  vague,  half-educated  notions 
which  were  then  in  fashion,  compounded  of  igno- 
rance, tradition,  and  prejudice,  and  held  in  place 
by  stereotyped  phrases  and  dogmas  with  a  cement 
of  social  envy  and  political  suspicion. 

The  people  of  the  period  found  themselves  happy 
and  prosperous.  Their  lives  were  easy,  and  free 
from  gross  cares  and  from  great  political  anxieties. 
They  knew  little  and  cared  less  about  other  coun- 
tries. They  were  generally  satisfied  with  some 
crude  notions  and  easy  prejudices  about  institutions 
and  social  states  of  which  they  really  had  no  know- 
ledge. Niles  knew  no  more  of  the  English  Consti- 
tution and  English  politics  than  a  Cherokee  Indian 
knew  of  the  politics  of  the  United  States.  The 
American  people  did  not  think  of  their  economic 
and  social  condition  as  peculiar  or  exceptional. 
They  supposed  that  any  other  nation  could  be  just 
like  the  United  States  if  it  chose.  They  thought 
the  political  institutions,  or,  more  strictly,  the  po- 
litical "  principles,"  of  this  country  made  all  the 
difference.  They  gave  their  confidence  to  the 
great  principles,  accordingly,  all  the  more  because 
those  principles  flatter  human  nature.  One  can 
easily  discern  in  Jackson's  popularity  an  element 
i  40  Niles,  145. 


JACKSON'S  INAUGURATION  179 

of  instinct  and  personal  recognition  by  the  mass  of 
the  people.  They  felt,  "  He  is  one  of  us."  "  He 
stands  by  us."  "  He  is  not  proud,  and  does  not 
care  for  style,  but  only  for  plenty  of  what  is  sound, 
strong,  and  good."  "He  thinks  just  as  we  do 
about  this."  The  anecdotes  about  him  which  had 
the  greatest  currency  were  those  which  showed  him 
trampling  on  some  conventionality  of  polite  society, 
or  shocking  the  tastes  and  prejudices  of  people 
from  "  abroad."  In  truth  Jackson  never  did  these 
things  except  for  effect,  or  when  carried  away  by 
his  feelings,  but  his  adherents  had  a  most  enjoyable 
sense  of  their  own  power  in  supporting  him  in  defi- 
ance of  sober,  cultivated  people,  who  disliked  him 
for  his  violence,  ignorance,  and  lack  of  cultivation. 
The  Jackson  party  flocked  to  Washington  to 
attend  the  inauguration.  "  They  really  seem," 
said  Webster,1  "  to  think  that  the  country  has 
been  rescued  from  some  great  danger."  There 
was  evidently  a  personal  and  class  feeling  involved 
in  their  triumph.  At  the  inauguration  ball  a  great 
crowd  of  people  assembled  who  had  not  been  ac- 
customed to  such  festivities.  Jackson  refused  to 
call  on  Adams,  partly  because,  as  he  said,  Adams 
got  his  office  by  a  bargain,  and  partly  because  he 
thought  that  Adams  could  have  stopped  the  cam- 
paign references  to  Mrs.  Jackson.  That  lady  had 
died  in  the  previous  December,  and  Jackson  was 
in  a  very  tender  frame  of  mind  in  regard  to  her 

i  1  Curtis's  Webster,  340.    On  the  crowd,  see  I  Webster's  Cor- 
Despondence,  470,  473. 


180  ANDREW  JACKSON 

memory.1  Adams  was  hurt  at  the  slight  put  upon 
him,  and  thought  that  he  had  deserved  other  treat- 
ment from  Jackson.2  In  March,  1832,  R.  M. 
Johnson  came  to  Adams  to  try  to  bring  about  a 
reconciliation  with  Jackson.  Nothing  came  of  it.3 
The  inaugural  address  contained  nothing  of  any 
importance.  There  was  a  disposition  to  give  Jack- 
son a  fair  chance.  Every  one  was  tired  of  party 
strife,4  and  there  was  no  disposition  in  any  quarter 
to  make  factious  opposition.  The  opposition  had 
taken  the  name  of  national  republicans.  They 
never  acknowledged  any  succession  to  the  federal- 
ists. They  claimed  to  belong  to  the  true  republi- 
can party,  but  to  hold  national  theories  instead 
of  State  rights  theories.  The  Jackson  party  was 
heterogeneous.  In  opposition  it  had  been  held 
together  by  the  hope  of  success,  but  it  had  not 
been  welded  together  into  any  true  party.  No 
one  yet  knew  what  Jackson  thought  about  any 
political  question.  It  had  been  an  unfortunate 
necessity  to  send  him  to  the  Senate  in  1823.  He 
had  made  a  record  on  tariff  and  internal  improve- 
ments. His  Coleman  letter,  it  is  true,  left  him 
safely  vague  on  tariff,  but  he  could  only  lose,  he 
could  not  possibly  gain,  by  making  a  record  on 
anything.  His  advantage  over  the  "  statesmen  " 
was  that  every  one  of  them  was  on  record  a  dozen 
times  on  every  public  question. 

1  The  New  York  American  followed  her  even  beyond  the  grave 

a  scurrilous  epitaph. 

2  8  Adams,  128.          8  8  Adams,  484.          *  5  Ann.  Reg.  1. 


JACKSON'S  CABINET  181 

Calhoun  had  been  reflected  Vice-President.  He 
now  understood  that  Jackson  would  take  only  one 
term,  and  that  he  (Calhoun)  would  have  all  Jack- 
son's support  in  1832.  Van  Buren,  however,  who 
had  come  into  Jackson's  political  family  at  a  late 
date,  had  views  and  ambitions  which  crossed  this 
programme  of  Calhoun.  These  two  men  came  into 
collision  in  the  formation  of  the  cabinet.  Jackson 
introduced  two  innovations.  He  put  the  Secre- 
taries back  more  nearly  into  the  place  in  which 
they  belong  by  the  original  theory  of  the  law.  He 
made  them  executive  clerks  or  staff  officers.  The 
fashion  has  grown  up  of  calling  the  Secretaries 
the  President's  "  constitutional  advisers."  It  is 
plain  that  they  are  not  anything  of  the  kind.  He 
is  not  bound  to  consult  them,  and,  if  he  does,  it 
does  not  detract  from  his  responsibility.  Jackson, 
by  the  necessity  of  his  character  and  preparation, 
and  by  the  nature  of  the  position  to  which  he  had 
been  elected,  must  lean  on  somebody.  He  had  a 
number  of  intimate  friends  and  companions  on 
whom  he  relied.  They  did  not  hold  important 
public  positions.  They  came  to  be  called  the 
"  kitchen  cabinet."  The  men  were  William  B. 
Lewis,  Amos  Kendall,  Duff  Green,  and  Isaac  Hill. 
If  the  Secretaries  had  been  the  "  constitutional 
advisers"  of  the  President,  their  first  right  and 
duty  would  have  been  to  break  off  his  intimacy 
with  these  irresponsible  persons,  and  to  prevent 
their  influence.  Jackson's  second  innovation  was 
that  he  did  not  hold  cabinet  councils.  Hence  his 


182  ANDREW  JACKSON 

administration  lacked  unity  and  discipline.  It  did 
not  have  the  strength  of  hearty  and  conscious 
cooperation.  Each  Secretary  went  his  way,  and 
gossip  and  newsmongering  had  a  special  field  of 
activity  open  to  them.  The  cabinet  was  not  a 
strong  one.  Van  Buren  was  Secretary  of  State. 
S.  D.  Ingham  was  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  He 
had  been  an  active  Pennsylvania  politician,  and  a 
member  of  the  House  for  the  last  seven  years. 
John  H.  Eaton,  of  Kentucky,  was  Secretary  of 
War.  He  had  married,  for  his  first  wife,  one 
of  Mrs.  Jackson's  nieces,  and  had  been  an  in- 
timate friend  of  Jackson.  He  was  brother-in-law 
of  Lewis.  He  finished,  in  1817,  a  life  of  Jackson, 
which  had  been  begun  by  Major  John  Eeid.  He 
had  been  in  the  Senate  since  1818.  John  Branch, 
of  North  Carolina,  was  Secretary  of  the  Navy. 
He  had  been  'in  the  Senate  since  1823.1  John  M. 
Berrien,  of  Georgia,  was  Attorney-General.  He 
had  been  in  the  Senate  since  1824.  William 
T.  Barry,  of  Kentucky,  who  had  been  chief  jus- 
tice of  the  new  Supreme  Court  of  that  State,  was 
Postmaster-General,  with  a  seat  in  the  cabinet,  a 
privilege  to  which  that  officer  had  not  previously 
been  admitted.  McLean  passed  into  high  favor 
with  the  new  administration,  and  was  asked  to 
keep  the  postmaster-generalship  with  its  new  rank. 
When  the  general  proscription  began  he  would 
not  admit  it  as  to  his  department.  He  was  trans- 
ferred to  the  bench  of  the  Supreme  Court.2  Ing* 
1  See  page  122  and  note  2.  2  8  Adams,  112. 


JACKSON'S  CABINET  183 

ham,  Branch,  and  Berrien  were  understood  to  be 
the  Calhoun  men  in  the  cabinet. 

The  men  who  controlled  the  administration  were 
the  members  of  the  kitchen  cabinet.  Lewis  does 
not  appear  to  have  had  any  personal  ambition. 
He  wanted  to  return  to  Tennessee,  but  Jackson 
remonstrated  that  Lewis  must  not  abandon  him  in 
the  position  to  which  he  had  been  elevated.1  Lewis 
was  made  Second  Auditor  of  the  Treasury.  He 
only  asked  for  an  office  with  little  work  to  be 
done.2  His  character  and  antecedents  have  already 
been  noticed.  It  will  appear  below  that  he  was 
far  more  unwilling  to  relinquish  office  than  he  had 
been  to  take  it. 

Amos  Kendall  was  born  in  Massachusetts  in 
1789.  He  was  a  graduate  of  Dartmouth  College. 
In  1814  he  went  to  Washington.  In  1815  he 
was  a  tutor  in  Henry  Clay's  family.  He  edited 
a  newspaper,  the  Frankfort  "Argus  of  Western 
America,"  and  practised  law,  and  was  postmaster 
at  Georgetown,  Kentucky.  He  became  a  leading 
"  relief  "  man,  director  in  the  Bank  of  the  Common- 
wealth, and  as  such  an  enemy  of  the  Bank  of  the 
United  States.  Many  of  Clay's  old  supporters, 
who  became  relief  men,  were  carried  over  to  Jack- 
son between  1824  and  1828.  Kendall  was  one  of 
these.  He  had  expected  an  office  from  Clay,  and 
was  offered  one,  but  it  did  not  satisfy  him.  He 
had  an  acrimonious  correspondence  with  Clay  in 
1828.3  He  was  in  debt.  Clay  was  one  of  his 

1  3  Parton,  180.  2  Kendall's  Autobiography,  308. 

k       3  Telegraph  Extra,  305. 


184  ANDREW  JACKSON 

creditors.  His  war  with  Clay  won  him  Jackson's 
favor.  Kendall  was  an  enigmatical  combination 
of  good  and  bad,  great  and  small  traits.  His  abil- 
ity to  handle  important  State  questions,  and  his 
skill  as  a  politician,  are  both  beyond  question.  He 
prostituted  his  talents  to  partisan  purposes,  and 
was  responsible  as  much  as  any  other  one  man 
for  the  bad  measures  adopted  by  Jackson.  In  his 
private  character  he  showed  admirable  traits  of 
family  devotion  and  generosity.  As  a  public  man 
he  belonged  to  the  worst  school  of  American  poli- 
ticians. He  brought  the  vote  of  Kentucky  to 
Washington,  and  was  appointed  Fourth  Auditor 
of  the  Treasury.  As  time  went  on  he  proved  more 
and  more  the  master  spirit  of  the  administration. 
Harriet  Martineau  wrote  of  him,  in  1836,  as  fol- 
lows: "I  was  fortunate  enough  once  to  catch  a 
glimpse  of  the  invisible  Amos  Kendall,  one  of  the 
most  remarkable  men  in  America.  He  is  supposed 
to  be  the  moving  spring  of  the  whole  administra- 
tion, the  thinker,  planner,  and  doer;  but  it  is  all 
in  the  dark.  Documents  are  issued  of  ar  excellence 
which  prevents  their  being  attributed  to  persons 
who  take  the  responsibility  of  them  ;  a  correspond- 
ence is  kept  up  all  over  the  country  for  which  no 
one  seems  to  be  answerable ;  work  is  done,  of  goblin 
extent  and  with  goblin  speed,  which  makes  men 
look  about  them  with  a  superstitious  wonder ;  and 
the  invisible  Amos  Kendall  has  the  credit  of  it 
all.  .  .  .  He  is  undoubtedly  a  great  genius.  He 
unites  with  his  '  great  talent  for  silence '  a  splendid 


THE  KITCHEN  CABINET  185 

audacity." 1  She  goes  on  to  say  that  he  rarely 
appeared  in  public,  and  seemed  to  keep  up  the 
mystery.  She  attributes  some  of  Lewis's  work  to 
Kendall,  but  the  passage  is  a  very  fair  representa- 
tion of  the  opinions  of  Washington  society  about 
Kendall.  He  had  very  great  executive  and  literary 
ability.  Claiborne  said  of  him,  in  1856  :  "  When  I 
first  saw  him,  he  had  a  whooping  voice,  an  asth- 
matic cough,  with  a  stooping  frame  and  a  phthisicky 
physiognomy.  ....  Yet  this  little  whiffet  of  a  man, 
whom  the  hoosiers  would  not  call  even  an  individ- 
ual, .  .  .  was  the  Atlas  that  bore  on  his  shoulders 
the  weight  of  Jackson's  administration.  He  ori- 
ginated, or  was  consulted  in  advance,  upon  every 
great  measure,  and  what  the  prompt  decision  and 
indomitable  will  of  the  illustrious  chief  resolved 
upon,  the  subtle  and  discriminating  intellect  of 
Kendall  elaborated  and  upheld."  2 

Duff  Green  was  a  fighting  partisan  editor.  He 
had  the  virtue  of  his  trade.  He  was  loyal  to  the 
standard  to  which  he  had  once  sworn.  He  was  a 
Calhoun  man,  and  he  continued  to  be  a  retainer  of 
the  most  unflinching  loyalty.  For  the  first  years 
of  Jackson's  administration,  Green,  as  editor  of 
the  "organ,"  stood  on  guard  all  the  time  to  ad- 
vance the  cause  of  the  administration. 

1  1  Martineau's   Western   Travel,   155.     Cf.  also   1  Society  in 
America,  45, 

2  Quoted  in  Hudson's  Journalism,  243.     Cf.  also  p.  248,  where 
Kives's  assertion  is  quoted,  in  contradiction,  that  Jackson  was 
the  Atlas  of  his  own  administration. 


186  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Isaac  Hill  was  born  in  Massachusetts  in  1788. 
His  education  was  picked  up  in  a  printing-office. 
In  1810  he  bought  and  began  to  edit  the  "  Pa- 
triot,"1 published  at  Concord,  New  Hampshire. 
He  edited  his  paper  with  skill  and  ability,  propa- 
gating "  true  republicanism  "  in  partibus  infide- 
Hum,  for  the  people  about  him  were  almost  all 
federalists.  His  main  "  principle  "  was  that  things 
were  in  the  hands  of  an  "  aristocracy,"  and  that  he 
ought  to  organize  the  "  honest  yeomanry  "  in  order 
to  oust  that  aristocracy  from  power.2  He  gained 
adherents.  His  paper  became  influential,  and  he 
built  up  a  democratic  party  in  New  Hampshire.3 
He  had  long  favored  strict  party  proscription.  In 
1818  he  remonstrated  with  Governor  Plumer  for 
appointing  a  federalist  sheriff.4  He  had  the  ran- 
corous malignity  of  those  men  who  have  been  in  a 
contest  with  persons  who  have  treated  them  from 
above  downwards.  He  was  not  able  to  carry  New 
Hampshire  for  Jackson  in  1828,  but  the  vote  was 
24,000  for  Adams  to  20,600  for  Jackson.  HiU 

1  Hudson's  Journalism,  272,  on  the  Patriot. 

2  Bradley's  Hill. 

8  He  had  kept  a  boarding-house,  at  which  members  of  the 
Legislature,  etc.,  boarded.  In  1823  he  is  referred  to  as  a  power. 
1  Webster's  Correspondence,  324,  During  the  New  Hampshire 
election  of  1830,  forged  documents  were  sent  on  from  Washington 
to  prove  Upham,  the  anti- Jackson  candidate  for  Governor,  guilty 
of  smuggling  under  the  embargo.  39  Niles,  156.  Mason  charged 
Hill  with  having  sent  the  papers.  1  Webster's  Correspondence, 
495. 

*  Plumer's  Plumer,  471. 


THE  VICTORS  AND  THE  SPOILS         187 

was  immediately  taken  into  the  innermost  circle  at 
Washington. 

The  election  of  Jackson  meant  that  an  unedu- 
cated Indian  fighter  had  been  charged  with  the 
power  of  the  presidency,  and  that  these  four  men 
wielded  it  through  and  for  him.  Van  Buren  fol- 
lowed, in  order  to  win  the  aid  of  Jackson  for  the 
succession.  He  did  not  put  forth  any  guiding 
force.  Eaton  had  some  share  in  the  kitchen  cab- 
inet. No  other  member  of  the  cabinet  had  any 
influence.  Barry,  another  relief  man,  but  person- 
ally quite  insignificant,  was  at  the  disposal  of  the 
kitchen  cabinet.  Henry  Lee  had  made  himself 
"  impossible  "  by  an  infamous  domestic  crime.  He 
was  offended  at  the  poor  share  in  the  spoils  offered 
to  him,  and  withdrew,  relieving  the  administration 
of  a  load.  Edward  Livingston  was  in  the  Senate, 
but  no  direct  influence  by  him  on  the  administra- 
tion, during  the  first  two  years,  is  discernible.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  Benton. 

Some  vague  expressions  in  the  inaugural  about 
"  reform "  and  the  civil  service  frightened  the 
office-holders,  who  had  already  been  alarmed  by  ru- 
mors of  coming  proscription.  There  was  an  army 
of  office-seekers  and  editors  in  Washington,  who 
had  a  very  clear  and  positive  theory  that  the  vic- 
tory which  they  had  won,  under  Jackson's  name, 
meant  the  acquisition  and  distribution  amongst 
them  of  all  the  honors  and  emoluments  of  the  fed- 
eral government.  They  descended  on  the  federal 
administration  as  if  upon  a  conquered  domain* 


188  ANDREW  JACKSON 

The  office-holders  of  that  day  had  generally  staked 
their  existence  on  the  mode  of  getting  a  living 
which  the  civil  service  offered.  It  did  not  pay 
well,  but  it  was  supposed  to  be  easy,  tranquil,  and 
secure.  All  these  persons  who  were  over  forty 
years  of  age  saw  ruin  staring  them  in  the  face. 
It  was  too  late  for  them  to  change  their  habits  or 
acquire  new  trades.1  All  the  stories  by  eye-wit- 
nesses testify  to  the  distress  and  terror  of  the  "ins," 
and  the  rapacity  of  the  "  outs,"  at  that  time.  It 
is  certain  that  the  public  service  lost  greatly  by  the 
changes.  Sometimes  they  were  made  on  account 
of  trivial  disrespect  to  Jackson.2  It  is  not  clear 
who  was  the  author  or  instigator  of  the  policy. 
Lewis  is  said  to  have  opposed  it.  Kendall  does 
not  appear  to  have  started  with  the  intention  of 
proscription.  March  24,  1829,  he  wrote  to  the 
editor  of  the  Baltimore  "  Patriot :  "  3  "  The  inter- 
ests of  the  country  demand  that  the  [Fourth  Au- 
ditor's] office  shall  be  filled  with  men  of  business, 
and  not  with  babbling  politicians.  Partisan  feel- 
ings shall  not  enter  here,  if  I  can  keep  them  out. 
To  others  belongs  the  whole  business  of  electioneer- 
ing." Probably  Jackson  believed  that  the  depart- 
ments were  full  of  corrupt  persons,  and  that  Adams 
and  Clay  had  demoralized  the  whole  civil  service, 

1  Washington  removed  nine  persons,  one  a  defaulter ;  Adams, 
ten,  one  a  defaulter  ;  Jefferson,  thirty-nine  ;  Madison,  five,  three 
defaulters ;  Monroe,  nine ;  Adams,  two,  both  for  cause.  5  Ann. 
Beg.  19. 

a  1  Curtis's  Webster,  348. 

*  49  Niles,  43.     Cf.  Kendall's  Autobiography,  292. 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM          189 

so  that  a  complete  change  was  necessary.  It  would 
be  quite  in  character  for  Jackson  to  take  all  the 
campaign  declamation  literally.  One  man,  Tobias 
Watkins,  Fourth  Auditor,  was  found  short  in  his 
accounts.1  This  seemed  to  offer  proof  of  all  that 
had  been  affirmed.  The  proscription  was  really 
enforced  by  the  logic  of  the  methods  and  teachings 
of  the  party  while  in  opposition.  The  leaders  had 
been  taken  literally  by  the  party  behind  them,  and 
by  the  workers,  writers,  and  speakers  who  had  en- 
listed under  them.  If  they  had  failed  to  reward 
their  adherents  by  the  spoils,  or  if  they  had  avowed 
the  hollowness  and  artificiality  of  their  charges 
against  the  last  administration,  they  would  have 
thrown  their  party  into  confusion,  and  would  have 
destroyed  their  power.  It  has  been  shown  above 
how  the  spoils  system  had  been  developed,  since 
the  beginning  of  the  century,  in  Pennsylvania  and 
New  York.2  It  is  a  crude  and  incorrect  notion 
that  Andrew  Jackson  corrupted  the  civil  service. 
His  administration  is  only  the  date  at  which  a  cor- 
rupt use  of  the  spoils  of  the  public  service,  as  a 

1  Adams  calls  this  "  the  bitterest  drop  in  the  cup  of  my  afflic- 
tions." 8  Adams,  144.     Again  he  says,  "  The  wrong  done  to  me 
and  my  administration  by  the  misconduct  of  Watkins  deserves  a 
severer  animadversion  from  me  than  from  Jackson."     8  Adams, 
290.     He  there  depicts  Jackson's  rancor  against  Watkins.     Cf. 
p.  453.    Niles  describes  the  virulent  political  animus  of  the  prose- 
cution.    36  Niles,  421.     After  Watkins's  term  of  imprisonment 
was  over,  he  was  detained  on  account  of  an  unpaid  fine.     By 
Jackson's  personal  order  a  label,  "  Criminal's  Apartment,"  was 
put  over  the  door  of  the  room  in  which  he  was  kept. 

2  Page  131. 


190  ANDREW  JACKSON 

cement  for  party  organization,  under  democratic- 
republican  self-government,  having  been  perfected 
into  a  highly  finished  system  in  New  York  and 
Pennsylvania,  was  first  employed  on  the  federal 
arena.  The  student  who  seeks  to  penetrate  the 
causes  of  the  corruption  of  the  civil  service  must 
go  back  to  study  the  play  of  human  nature  under 
the  political  dogmas  and  institutions  of  the  States 
named.  He  cannot  rest  satisfied  with  the  explan- 
ation that  "  Andrew  Jackson  did  it."  In  a  con- 
versation between  two  senators,  about  the  reasons 
for  Jackson's  popularity,  which  is  reported  by  a 
German  visitor,  it  is  said  that  he  acted  on  two 
maxims :  "  Give  up  no  friend  to  win  an  enemy," 
and  "  Be  strong  with  your  friends  and  then  you 
can  defy  your  enemies." l  These  are  grand  max- 
ims of  wise  warfare,  but  they  sound  like  Kendall, 
not  like  Jackson.  The  latter  certainly  never  for- 
mulated any  philosophical  maxims,  but  he  acted 
on  these  two. 

Thirty-eight  of  Adams's  nominations  had  been 
postponed  by  the  Senate,  so  as  to  give  that  patron- 
age to  Jackson.  Between  March  4,  1829,  and 
March  22,  1830,  491  postmasters  and  239  other 
officers  were  removed,  and  as  the  new  appointees 
changed  all  their  clerks,  deputies,  etc.,  it  was  esti- 
mated that  2,000  changes  in  the  civil  service  took 
place.2  Jackson,  as  we  have  seen,  had  made  a 
strong  point  against  the  appointment  of  members 

1  2  Aristokratie  in  America,  177. 

2  Hohnes's  speech  in  the  Senate,  April  28,  183(X 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM          191 

of  Congress  to  offices  in  the  gift  of  the  President. 
In  one  year  he  appointed  more  members  of  Con- 
gress to  office  than  any  one  of  his  predecessors  in 
his  whole  term.1  The  Senate,  although  democratic, 
refused  to  confirm  many  of  the  nominations  made. 
Henry  Lee,  appointed  consul  to  Algiers,  and  James 
B.  Gardner,  register  of  the  land  office,  were  unani- 
mously rejected.  Others  were  rejected  by  large 
votes.2  Isaac  Hill  was  one  of  these.  Adams  was 
told  that  Hill's  rejection  was  caused,  in  part,  by 
the  publication  by  him  of  a  pamphlet,  containing 
"  a  false  and  infamous  imputation  "  on  Mrs.  Ad^ 
ams ;  so  that  Adams  also  had  a  grievance  like 
Jackson's.3  Webster  said  that,  but  for  the  fear  of 
Jackson's  popularity  out-of-doors,  the  Senate  would 
have  rejected  half  his  appointments.4  The  Senate 
objected  to  the  obvious  distribution  of  rewards 
among  the  partisan  editors  who  had  run  country 
newspapers  in  Jackson's  influence.5  Eaton  had 
visited  Binns,  and  had  made  to  him  a  distinctly 
corrupt  proposition  to  reward  him  with  public 
printing,6  if  he  would  turn  to  Jackson.  The  re- 
jection of  the  editors  was  construed  by  the  Jackson 
men  as  a  proscription  of  "  printers  "  by  the  "  aris- 
tocratic" Senate.7  Kendall  was  confirmed  by  the 
casting  vote  of  Calhoun,  for  fear  that  he  would,  if 
not  confirmed,  set  up  a  newspaper  in  competition 

l  5  Ann.  Beg.,  20.  2  5  Ann.  Beg.,  21. 

8  8  Adams,  217.  4  1  Webster's  Correspondence,  501. 

5  1  Webster's  Correspondence,  488.  6  Binns,  253. 

7  Kendall's  Autobiography,  370.     New  York  Courier  and  En* 
quirer,  in  Bradley's  Hill,  105. 


192  ANDREW  JACKSON 

with  Green's  "  Telegraph  "  for  the  position  of  ad- 
ministration organ.1  The  view  of  the  matter  which 
was  promulgated,  and  which  met  with  general  ac- 
ceptance, was :  u  The  printer  and  editor  Hill,  and 
the  schoolmaster  and  editor  Kendall,  both  enter- 
prising sons  of  dear  Yankee-land,  were  especially 
eyesores  in  the  sight  of  this  exclusive  aristocracy."  2 
On  subsequent  votes  some  of  the  appointments 
were  confirmed,  for  it  was  found  that  Jackson  was 
thrown  into  a  great  rage  against  the  Senate  which 
dared  reject  his  appointments.  He  was  delighted 
when  Hill,  in  1831,  was  elected  by  the  Legislature 
of  New  Hampshire  a  member  of  the  Senate,  which 
had  refused  to  confirm  him  as  Second  Comptroller 
of  the  Treasury.  Jackson  threw  all  the  adminis- 
tration influence  in  favor  of  Hill's  election.  Here 
we  have  an  illustration  of  a  method  of  his  of  which 
we  shall  have  many  illustrations  hereafter.  When 
he  was  crossed  by  any  one  in  a  course  in  which  he 
was  engaged,  he  drew  back  to  gather  force  with 
which  to  carry  his  point  in  some  mode  so  much 
more  distasteful  to  his  opponents  than  his  first 
enterprise  that  it  would  be  a  kind  of  punishment 
to  them  and  a  redress  to  himself.  Hill  was  elected 
senator  from  a  motive  of  this  kind.  The  "  Courier 
and  Enquirer  "  drew  a  picture  of  him  entering  the 
Senate  and  saying  to  the  men  who  violated  their 
oaths  by  attempting  to  disfranchise  citizens :  "  Give 
me  room  —  stand  back  —  do  you  know  me  ?  I  am 

1  Kendall's  Autobiography,  371. 

2  Bradley's  Hill,  83. 


THE  EATON  AFFAIR  193 

that  Isaac  Hill,  of  New  Hampshire,  who,  in  this 
very  spot  you  slandered,  vilified,  and  stript  of  his 
rights  —  the  people,  your  masters,  have  sent  me 
here  to  take  my  seat  in  this  very  chamber  as  your 
equal  and  your  peer."  l  Hill  resigned  in  1836. 

Van  Buren  and  Calhoun  at  once  began  to 
struggle  for  the  control  of  the  patronage  which 
was  made  disposable  by  the  system  of  proscrip- 
tion. Their  contest  for  the  succession  rent  the 
administration ;  and  this  ending  came  about  in  a 
very  odd  way.  It  was  a  very  noteworthy  fact  that 
this  administration,  which  represented  a  certain 
contempt  for  social  forms  and  etiquette,  should  im- 
mediately go  to  pieces  on  a  question  of  that  kind. 
So  true  is  it  that  etiquette  is  never  burdensome 
until  we  try  to  dispense  with  it.  The  strange  story 
is  as  follows:  In  January,  1829,  John  H.  Eaton 
married  Mrs.  Timberlake,  widow  of  a  purser  in 
the  navy,  who  had,  a  short  time  before,  committed 
suicide,  while  on  service  in  the  Mediterranean, 
because  he  could  not  conquer  habits  of  excessive 
drinking.  Mrs.  Timberlake  was  the  daughter  of  a 
Washington  tavern  keeper.  As  Peggy  O'Neil  she 
had  been  well  known  about  Washington.  Eaton 
had  paid  her  such  attention,  before  her  husband's 
death,  as  to  provoke  gossip.  He  consulted  Jackson 
before  the  marriage.  Jackson,  having  in  mind  the 
case  of  his  own  wife,  was  chivalrously  ready  to 
take  sides  with  any  woman  whose  reputation  was 
assailed.  He  made  no  objection  to  the  marriage, 

1  Bradley'a  Hill,  105,  107. 


194  ANDREW  JACKSON 

When  it  occurred,  several  persons  remonstrated 
with  Jackson  about  it,  on  the  ground  that  Eaton 
was  to  be  in  the  cabinet,  and  that  it  would  hurt  the 
administration.  Jackson  replied  with  spirit  to  the 
effect  that  Mrs.  Eaton  was  not  to  be  in  the  cabinet. 
If  he  had  kept  that  attitude  towards  the  matter 
there  might  have  been  no  trouble.  By  Eaton's  ap- 
pointment his  wife  was  introduced  to  the  first  circle 
in  Washington.  The  wives  of  the  other  Secretaries 
and  the  wife  of  the  Vice-President  did  not  recog- 
nize her.  She  tried  to  force  her  way,  and  General 
Jackson  tried  to  help  her.  He  made  a  political 
question  of  it.  R.  M.  Johnson  was  the  agent  for 
conferring  with  the  Secretaries  to  prevail  on  them 
to  persuade  their  wives  to  recognize  Mrs.  Eaton. 
The  gentlemen  were  approached  individually. 
Each  said  that  he  left  such  matters  to  his  wife, 
and  could  not  undertake  to  overrule  her  judgment. 
This  answer  had  no  effect  on  Jackson.  Mrs.  Donel- 
son,  wife  of  Jackson's  nephew  and  private  secre- 
tary, and  presiding  lady  at  the  White  House,  was 
as  recalcitrant  as  any  one.  She  was  banished  to 
Tennessee  for  some  months.  Mrs.  Huyghens,  wife 
of  the  Dutch  minister,  refused  to  sit  by  Mrs.  Eaton 
at  a  public  ball.  Jackson  threatened  to  send  her 
husband  home.  September  8,  Lewis,  pursuing  his 
favorite  method,  wrote  to  inquire  of  Jackson  in  re- 
gard to  a  story  which  he  remembered  to  have  heard 
from  Jackson,  but  which  he  now  wanted  to  get  into 
writing.  Jackson  replied  on  the  10th,  giving  de- 
tails of  an  incident,  in  1824,  when  Mrs.  Timber- 


THE  EATON  AFFAIR  195 

lake  asked  his  protection  against  General  Call; 
she,  Call,  Jackson,  and  Eaton  being  at  the  time  all 
inmates  of  her  father's  house.  Call's  plea  in  justi- 
fication may  be  omitted.  "  I,"  writes  Jackson, 
"gave  him  a  severe  lecture  for  taking  up  such 
ideas  of  female  virtue,  unless  on  some  positive  evi- 
dence of  his  own,  of  which  he  acknowledged  he  had 
none,  only  information  —  and  I  enforced  my  ad- 
monition by  refering  him  to  the  rebuff  he  had  met 
with,  which  I  trusted  for  the  future  would  guard 
him  from  the  like  improper  conduct.  ...  I  then 
told  you  &  have  ever  since  repeated,  that  I  had 
never  seen  or  heard  aught  against  the  chastity  of 
Mrs-  Timberlake  that  was  calculated  to  raise  even 
suspicion  of  her  virtue  in  the  mind  of  any  one 
who  was  not  under  the  influence  of  deep  preju- 
dices, or  prone  to  jealousy  —  that  I  believed  her  a 
virtuous  &  much  injured  female."  1 

The  purpose  of  this  letter  seems  to  have  been  to 
get  Jackson's  personal  testimony  in  favor  of  Mrs. 
Eaton.  It  certainly  revealed  the  ground  of  his 
own  conviction.  On  the  same  day  on  which  it  was 
written  Jackson  held  a  meeting  of  his  cabinet, 
before  which  Ely  and  Campbell,  two  clergymen 
who  were  held  by  Jackson  partly  responsible  for 
the  stories  about  Mrs.  Eaton,  were  called  to  appear. 
Jackson  interrogated  them,  argued  with  them,  and 
strove  to  refute  their  statements,  as  a  means  of 
convincing  the  members  of  the  cabinet  that  there 
was  no  ground  for  the  position  their  wives  had 
i  Ford  MSS. 


196  ANDREW  JACKSON 

taken.      Of   course   this   foolish  and  unbecoming 
proceeding  had  no  result. 

Van  Buren,  being  a  widower,  was  in  a  certain 
position  of  advantage,  which  he  used  by  showing 
Mrs.  Eaton  public  and  private  courtesies.  In  this 
way  he  won  Jackson's  heart,  for  as  the  matter  went 
on  Jackson  became  more  and  more  engaged  in  it. 
On  the  other  hand,  Calhoun  suffered  in  Jackson's 
good  graces  by  the  fault  of  Mrs.  Calhoun,  who  had 
been  conspicuous  for  disapproval  of  Mrs.  Eaton. 
Jackson  had  been  growing  cold  towards  Calhoun 
for  some  time.  He  doubted  if  Calhoun  was  thor- 
oughly loyal  to  him  in  1825,1  or  in  1828.  He 
thought  that  Calhoun,  in  1825,  would  have  made 
other  arrangements  than  those  with  Jackson,  if  any 
more  convenient  ones  had  been  offered  him.  Cal- 
houn did,  in  fact,  declare,  in  1825,  that  he  was 
quite  neutral  as  between  Adams  and  Jackson.  He 
did  not  interfere  at  all  with  the  election.2  The 
Eaton  affair  was  either  a  pretext  or  a  cause  of 
widening  the  breach  between  them.  The  factions 
opposed  to  Calhoun  tried  to  increase  the  bad  feel- 
ing. Jackson  was  led  to  believe,  and  he  often 
affirmed,  that  the  attack  on  Mrs.  Eaton  was  a  plot 
to  drive  Eaton  out  of  the  cabinet.  When  forced 
to  justify  his  own  interference,  he  put  it  on  this 
ground.  He  said  that  Clay  was  at  the  bottom  of 
the  attack  on  Mrs.  Eaton.  All  this  trouble  in 

1  Wise  (p.  82)  says  that  Jackson  was  very  angry  with  Calhoun 
after  the  election  in  1825. 

2  Cobb,  219. 


THE  EATON  AFFAIR  197 

the  cabinet  remained  for  the  time  unknown  to  the 
public.  ' 

Lewis's  statement,  given  by  Parton,1  covers  the 
history  of  all  Jackson's  relations  with  Calhoun. 
Lewis  had  an  inkling,  in  1819,  that  Calhoun  had 
not,  as  Jackson  supposed,  been  Jackson's  friend 
in  Monroe's  cabinet,  hi  the  Seminole  war  affair. 
Lewis  wrote  to  the  "  Aurora,"  suggesting  that 
opinion,  but  Jackson  wrote  to  him  from  Wash- 
ington to  dismiss  any  suspicion  as  to  Calhoun's 
unfriendliness  in  that  matter.  It  seems  to  be 
necessary  to  read  between  the  lines  of  Lewis's 
statement,  on  pages  315—30.  Did  he  not  always 
retain  his  suspicion  of  Calhoun  ?  Was  he  not  on 
the  watch  for  any  evidence  to  confirm  it?  He 
speaks  as  if  he  had  rested  content  with  Jackson's 
assurance,  and  had  been  corrected  later  by  accident 
or  entirely  on  the  initiative  of  others.  He  does 
not  mention  the  first  attempt  made  by  the  old 
Crawford  men  to  get  over  into  the  Jackson  camp. 
It  was  not  an  easy  march,  for  in  1824  the  Craw- 
ford men,  as  the  "  regulars,"  hated  intensely  the 
Jackson  men,  as  upstarts  and  disorganizers.  Craw- 
ford had  carried  into  his  retirement  a  venomous 
and  rancorous  spirit,  the  chief  object  of  which  was 
Calhoun.  He  could  join  any  one  to  hurt  Calhoun. 

Lewis  wrote  to  Hayward,  March  28, 1827  :  "  In 
justice  to  Mr.  Calhoun,  however,  I  must  say  that  I 
am  inclined  to  think  more  favorably  of  him  now 
than  formerly.  This  is  a  delicate  subject  and 

1  3  Parton,  310. 


198  ANDREW  JACKSON 

ought  to  be  touched  with  great  caution.  It  is  a 
rock  upon  which  we  may  split." l  In  April,  1827, 
Van  Buren  and  Cambreleng  visited  Crawford,  and 
first  established  ties  between  him  and  Jackson. 
The  first  effect  was  a  letter  from  Crawford  to 
Balch,  a  neighbor  of  Jackson,  December  14,  1827, 
stating  that  Calhoun  and  his  friends  bandied  about 
the  epithet  "military  chieftain;"  also  that  Cal- 
houn favored  Adams  until  Clay  came  out  for 
Adams ; 2  and  adding  that  it  would  do  Jackson  a 
service  to  obtain  assurances  for  Crawford  that  Jack- 
son's advancement  would  not  benefit  Calhoun.3 
This  letter  was  meant  to  separate  Jackson  and 
Calhoun,  and  it  may  have  had  a  general  effect. 
Specific  consequences  cannot  be  traced  to  it.  In 
1828  there  was  a  project  to  run  Crawford  for  Vice- 
President  with  Adams.4  Adams  refused.5  Craw- 
ford also,  in  1828,  by  private  letters  to  the  Georgia 
electors,  tried  to  persuade  them  not  to  vote  for 
Calhoun.6  In  the  same  year  he  made  friends  with 
Clay,  writing  to  him  that  the  charge  of  bargain 
was  absurd. 

According  to  Lewis's  story,  James  A.  Hamilton, 
on  a  Jackson  electioneering  tour,  went  to  see  Craw- 
ford, in  January,  1828,  in  order  to  reconcile  him 
with  Jackson.  Lewis  instructed  Hamilton  what  to 
say  to  Crawford  on  Jackson's  part.  Hamilton  did 

1  Ford  MSS. 

2  Cf.  Lewis,  in  3  Parton,  315,  on  the  allusion  to  Banquo's  ghost 
in  Webster's  reply  to  Hayne. 

»  40  Niles,  12.  *  33  Niles,  315. 

*  7  Adams,  Diary,  390.  «  Cobb,  240. 


JACKSON'S  RELATIONS  WITH  CALHOUN    199 

not  see  Crawford.  He  left  the  business  in  the 
hands  of  Forsyth.  Forsyth  soon  wrote  to  Hamil- 
ton that  Crawford  affirmed  that  Jackson's  enmity 
against  him  was  groundless,  since  it  was  not  he, 
but  Calhoun,  in  Monroe's  cabinet,  who  had  tried 
to  have  Jackson  censured  for  his  proceedings  in 
Florida  in  1818.  In  April  or  May  Lewis  was  in 
New  York.  Hamilton  showed  him  Forsyth's  let- 
ter. For  the  time  Lewis  kept  this  information 
quite  to  himself.  He  was  too  clever  to  spoil  the 
force  of  it  by  using  it  too  soon,  and  he  well  under- 
stood how,  in  the  changes  and  chances  o£  politics,  a 
conjuncture  might  arise  in  which  such  a  fact  would 
gain  tenfold  force. 

In  April,  1828,  Henry  Lee  tried  to  draw  Cal- 
houn into  a  correspondence  about  the  construction 
of  the  orders  to  Jackson  in  1818.  Calhoun  offered 
to  give  Jackson  any  statements  or  explanations, 
but  declined  to  correspond  with  any  one  else.1 

In  November,  1829,  at  the  height  of  the  Peggy 
O'Neil  affair,  Jackson  gave  a  dinner  to  Monroe. 
At  this  dinner  Ringold  affirmed  that  Monroe  alone 
stood  by  Jackson  in  1818.  If  Ringold  did  not 
have  his  cue,  he  was  by  chance  contributing  aston- 
ishingly to  Lewis's  plans.  After  dinner  Lewis  and 
Eaton  kept  up  a  conversation,  within  ear-shot  of 
Jackson,  about  what  Ringold  had  said.  Of  course 
Jackson's  attention  was  soon  arrested,  and  he  be- 
gan to  ask  questions.  Lewis  then  told  him  that  he 
had  seen,  eighteen  months  before,  the  above  men- 
1  40  Niles,  14. 


200  ANDREW  JACKSON 

tioned  letter  of  Forsyth  to  Hamilton.  Jackson  dis- 
patched Lewis  to  New  York  the  next  morning  to 
get  that  letter.  In  all  this  story,  it  is  plain  how 
adroitly  these  men  managed  the  General,  and  how 
skilful  they  were  in  producing  "  accidents."  It  is 
evident  that  they  did  not  think  it  was  time  yet  to 
bring  about  the  explosion.  Lewis  came  back  from 
New  York  without  Forsyth' s  letter,  and  said  that 
it  was  thought  best  to  get  a  letter  directly  from 
Crawford,  containing  an  explicit  statement.  In 
this  position  the  matter  rested  all  winter.  It  is 
perfectly  clear  that  the  Jackson  managers  lost  faith 
in  Calhoun's  loyalty  to  Jackson  and  the  Jackson 
party,  and  that  they  were  hostile  to  him  in  1827-28, 
but  could  not  yet  afford  to  break  with  him.  Jack- 
son clung  to  his  friendships  and  alliances  with  a 
certain  tenacity.  As  Calhoun  was  drawn  more  and 
more  into  nullification,  the  Jackson  clique  took  a 
more  positive  attitude  in  opposition  to  it. 

In  the  autumn  of  1829  the  clique  around  Jack- 
son had  decided  that  he  must  run  again,  if  he 
should  live,  in  1832,  in  order  to  consolidate  the 
party,  which  no  one  else  could  lead  to  victory  at 
that  time,  and  that  Yan  Buren  must  succeed  him 
in  1836. 1  Lewis  was  already  committed  to  Van 
Buren,  and  Parton  brings  us  some  more  of  Lew- 
is's invaluable  testimony  as  to  this  arrangement.2 
Here,  for  once,  a  wire-puller  put  on  paper  a  clear 

1  Parton  says  that  Benton  was  booked  for  the  period  1844-52 
8  Parton,  297. 

2  3  Parton,  293,  297. 


CRAWFORD'S  REVELATION  201 

description  of  his  proceedings  in  a  typical  case. 
There  was  fear  in  the  Jackson  camp,  in  1829,  on 
account  of  Jackson's  very  bad  health,  that  he 
might  not  live  through  his  term.  Lewis  says  that 
he  and  Jackson  were  both  anxious  that  Van  Buren 
should  succeed  Jackson,  and  they  believed  that,  if 
Jackson  should  die,  a  political  testament  left  by 
him  would  have  great  influence.  Accordingly 
Jackson  wrote  a  letter  to  his  old  friend,  Judge 
Overton,  of  Tennessee,  dated  December  31,  1829, 
praising  Van  Buren,  and  expressing  grave  doubts 
about  Calhoun.  A  copy  was  duly  kept,  for  Judge 
Overton  was  not  informed  of  the  contingent  use 
for  which  the  letter  was  intended,  and  no  risk 
was  taken  as  to  his  care  in  preserving  the  letter. 
This  provision  having  been  made  for  the  case  that 
Jackson  should  die,  the  next  thing  was  to  provide 
for  his  reelection,  in  case  he  should  live. 

December  19,  1829,  the  "  Courier  and  Enquirer" 
came  out  in  favor  of  Van  Buren  for  the  succession, 
if  Jackson  should  not  stand  for  reelection.  The 
"  Telegraph  "  was  annoyed  at  this,  called  it "  prema- 
ture," and  likely  to  produce  division.1  These  two 
papers,  representing  the  Van  Buren  and  Calhoun 
factions  in  the  administration  party,  were  engaged, 
during  the  winter,  in  acrimonious  strife.2  Niles  no 
doubt  expressed  the  sentiment  of  sensible  people 
when  he  said,  April,  1830,  that  he  did  not  see  the 
necessity  of  action  on  the  subject  at  that  time.  His 
statement,  however,  only  showed  how  little  he  un« 
1  37  NUes,  300.  *  38  Niles>  169< 


202  ANDREW  JACKSON 

derstood  the  processes  by  which  the  people  mani- 
fest their  power  of  self-government. 

March  11,  1830,  Lewis  wrote  to  Colonel  Stan, 
baugh,  of  Pennsylvania,  suggesting  that  the  Penn- 
sylvania Legislature  should  address  to  Jackson  an 
appeal  to  stand  for  reelection.  To  the  end  that 
they  might  send  just  the  proper  appeal,  Lewis  in- 
closed it  to  them,  already  prepared  for  their  signa- 
tures. Lewis  wrote  to  Stanbaugh  that  he  did  not 
think  it  would  be  wise  for  Jackson's  friends  in 
Washington  to  [be  known  to]  lead  in  the  move- 
ment for  his  reelection,  and  Pennsylvania,  the 
stronghold  of  his  popularity,  seemed  to  be  the 
most  advantageous  place  from  which  the  move- 
ment might  [appear  to]  start.  The  address  came 
back  duly  signed  with  sixty-eight  names.  It  was 
published  in  the  "  Pennsylvania  Keporter,"  and 
copied  all  over  the  country  as  a  spontaneous  and 
irrepressible  call  of  the  people  to  the  "  old  hero  " 
not  to  desert  his  country.  The  enterprise  did  not 
run  off  quite  so  smoothly  as  Lewis's  narrative 
would  imply.  There  was  strong  opposition  by  the 
Calhoun  faction  in  the  Pennsylvania  Legislature 
to  Jackson's  renomination,  and  a  distinct  renomi- 
nation  could  not  be  carried.1  In  April  a  caucus 
of  the  New  York  Legislature  declared  that  it  re- 
sponded "  to  the  sentiment  of  the  Legislature  of 
Pennsylvania."  This  caucus  was  prompted  from 
Washington,  and  was  managed  by  the  editor  of 
the  "  Courier."  2  So  soon  as  the  example  was  set, 
1  38  NUes,  170.  2  Ibid. 


CRAWFORD'S  REVELATION  203 

other  Legislatures  followed  it.  In  January,  1831, 
the  "  Globe  "  said  that  General  Jackson  might  be 
regarded  as  before  the  country  for  reelection.1 

April  13,  1830  (Jefferson's  birthday),  while 
still  the  letter  from  Crawford  was  not  received, 
but  while  Jackson's  mind  was  full  of  suspicion 
against  Calhoun,  a  banquet  was  prepared  at  Wash- 
ington, which  was  intended  to  be  a  nullification 
demonstration.2  Jackson  gave  as  a  toast,  "Our 
federal  Union :  It  must  be  preserved."  This  was 
a  bomb-shell  to  the  nullifiers,  and  a  declaration  of 
war  against  Calhoun,  who  at  the  same  banquet 
offered  a  toast  and  made  a  speech,  the  point  of 
which  was  that  liberty  was  worth  more  than  union. 
How  much  the  personal  element  of  growing  sus- 
picion and  ill-will  towards  Calhoun  had  to  do  with 
the  attitude  which  Jackson  took  up  towards  nulli- 
fication is  a  matter  of  conjecture  and  inference. 
His  opinions,  however,  deduced  from  hatred  of  the 
Hartford  convention,  had  always  been  strongly 
favorable  to  the  Union,  and  the  men  in  the  kitchen 
cabinet,  except  Green,  were  strong  unionists,  al- 
though Jackson  and  they  all  were  likewise  strong 
State  rights  men.  Ten  years  earlier  Kendall  had 
maintained  the  major  premise  of  nullification  with 
great  zeal.3 

At  the  same  banquet  Isaac  Hill  offered  the 
following  toast  and  "  sentiment :  "  4  "  Democracy : 
4  Wherefore  do  I  take  my  flesh  in  my  teeth,  and 

1  39  Niles,  385.  2  1  Benton,  148. 

8  Autobiography,  222.  *  38  Niles,  153. 


204  ANDREW  JACKSON 

put  my  life  in  mine  hand  ?  Though  he  slay  me, 
yet  will  I  trust  in  him.'  '  The  quotation  is  from 
Job  xiii.  14,  and  "he"  is  usually  interpreted  as 
referring  to  God.  This  "sentiment"  therefore 
exalts  democracy  higher  than  any  other  known 
expression,  but  it  is  best  worth  remembering  as  an 
illustration  of  the  slave-like  spirit  which  is  bred  by 
adherence  to  absolutist  doctrines,  whether  the  abso- 
lute sovereign  be  an  autocrat  or  a  popular  majority. 
Altogether,  the  Jefferson's  birthday  banquet  was 
a  memorable  occasion. 

A  letter  from  Crawford's  own  hand,  disclosing 
the  attitude  of  Calhoun  in  Monroe's  cabinet  to- 
wards Jackson  and  his  proceedings  in  Florida  in 
1818,  was  at  last  received  about  May  1,  1830.  In 
this  letter  the  John  Rhea  letter  from  Jackson  to 
Monroe  first  comes  into  history,  and  is  the  pivot 
on  which  the  whole  Seminole  war  question,  in  its 
revived  form,  is  made  to  turn.  Crawford  said  that 
that  letter  was  produced  in  the  cabinet,  and  that  it 
brought  him  over  to  Jackson's  side,  but  that  Cal- 
houn persisted  in  hostility.  Monroe  and  every 
member  of  his  cabinet,  when  appealed  to,  denied 
that  the  Rhea  letter  was  produced,  or  brought  into 
consideration  in  1818  at  all.  Jackson  immediately, 
May  13th,  inclosed  a  copy  of  Crawford's  letter  to 
Calhoun,  and  demanded  an  explanation  of  Cal- 
houn's  apparent  perfidy,  as  he  construed  it.  Jack- 
son's main  point  in  this  letter,  which  was  evidently 
"  copied  "  for  him,  is  that  Calhoun  well  knew,  by 
virtue  of  his  position  in  the  cabinet,  and  as  he  had 


THE  RHEA  LETTER  205 

shown  by  his  orders,1  that  Jackson,  in  all  that  he 
did,  had  the  approval  and  connivance  of  the  ad- 
ministration. This  brought  out  all  the  tangled 
misunderstandings  about  Jackson's  letter  to  Mon- 
roe and  John  Rhea's  supposed  reply.  Calhoun 
at  once  recognized  his  position.  He  could  not 
understand  the  allusions  to  previous  understandings 
which  had  never  existed,  but  it  was  plain  that 
Crawford  had  opened  an  irreparable  breach  be- 
tween Jackson  and  him,  and  that  all  the  hopes 
which  Calhoun  had  built  upon  his  alliance  with 
Jackson  were  in  ruins.  He  also  saw  that  the  whole 
movement  was  a  Van  Buren  victory  over  him.  He 
replied  on  May  20th,  complaining  and  explaining. 
He  really  had  no  charge  to  repel.  He  had  done 
nothing  wrong,  and  was  guiltless  of  any  injustice 
or  perfidy  towards  Jackson.  The  whole  matter 
was  a  cabinet  secret.  Crawford  had  violated  con- 
fidence in  making  known  the  nature  of  the  pre- 
liminary discussions  which  preceded  the  adoption, 
by  Monroe's  cabinet,  of  a  definite  policy  as  to 
Jackson's  proceedings.  Calhoun  was  not  to  blame 
for  any  of  the  misunderstandings  about  the  pre- 
vious authorization  which  Jackson  thought  that  he 
had  received.  It  seems  that  Calhoun  might  have 
set  forth  this  position  with  dignity.  He  did  not 
do  so.  Jackson  replied  to  him,  May  30th,  in  a 
very  haughty  tone,  declaring  a  complete  breach 
between  them  on  the  ground  of  Calhoun's  duplicity. 
This  letter  was  plainly  prepared  by  the  persona 
1  See  ante,  page  70. 


206  ANDREW  JACKSON 

who  were  working  on  Jackson's  strong  personal 
feeling  about  his  Florida  campaign  to  bring  him 
to  a  breach  with  Calhoun,  and  to  throw  him  into  a 
close  alliance  with  Van  Buren.  The  plan  was  a 
complete  success.  Lewis  says  that  Jackson  sent 
Calhoun's  letter  of  May  20th  to  Van  Buren,  that 
he  might  read  it  and  give  advice  about  it,  but  that 
Van  Buren  would  not  read  it  because  he  did  not 
want  to  be  involved  in  the  affair  at  all.  Lewis 
further  says  that  Van  Buren  had  nothing  to  do 
with  getting  up  the  quarrel.  We  may  well  believe 
all  this.  Lewis  was  not  such  a  bungling  workman 
in  a  job  of  that  kind  as  to  commit  his  principal 
to  any  inconvenient  knowledge  or  compromising 
activity. 

The  quarrel  with  Calhoun  brought  on  a  quarrel 
with  Duff  Green  and  the  "  Telegraph."  Jackson 
wrote  to  Lewis  from  Wheeling :  "  Board  Steam 
Boat,  June  26, 1830,  The  truth  is,  he  [Duff  Green] 
has  professed  to  me  to  be  heart  &  soul,  against 
the  Bank,  but  his  idol  controls  him  as  much  as 
the  shewman  does  his  puppits,  and  we  must  get 
another  organ  to  announce  the  policy,  &  defend 
the  administration,  —  in  his  hands,  it  is  more  in- 
jured than  by  all  the  opposition."1  Amos  Ken- 
dall sent  for  Francis  P.  Blair,  an  old  Kentucky 
friend  and  co-worker  of  his,  and  his  successor  as 
editor  of  the  "  Argus."  Blair  was  then  thirty-nine 
years  old.  He  was  another  old  Clay  man,  con- 

1  Ford  MSS.    The  mention  of  the  "  Bank  "  here  is  very  note* 
worthy. 


THE  "GLOBE"   FOUNDED  207 

verted  by  Kentucky  relief  politics  into  a  Jackson 
man.  He  was  a  fanatical  opponent  of  the  Bank 
of  the  United  States,  and  strongly  opposed  to  nulli- 
fication. Parton  says  that  he  was  forty  thousand 
dollars  in  debt.  He  had  been  president  of  the 
Bank  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  and  was 
indebted  to  the  Bank  of  the  United  States.1  Blair 
started  the  "Globe,"  and  took  Green's  place  in 
the  kitchen  cabinet,  which  now  contained  a  very 
large  element  of  Kentucky  relief  politics.  Blair 
was  the  prince  of  partisan  editors,  a  man  made  to 
run  an  organ.  For  he  was  not  a  mere  mouth-piece. 
He  was  independent  and  able  to  go  alone,  but  had 
infinite  tact,  discretion,  and  shrewdness,  so  that  he 
was  an  easy  man  to  work  with.  The  organ,  there- 
fore, worked  perfectly.  Every  expression  in  it 
came  directly  from  the  White  House.  If  Blair 
spoke  without  consulting  Jackson,  the  harmony 
and  sympathy  of  their  ideas  was  such  that  Jack- 
son's mind  was  correctly  interpreted.  If  Jackson 
wanted  anything  to  be  said,  Blair  was  in  such  ac- 
cord that  it  cost  him  nothing  in  the  way  of  conces- 
sion to  say  it.  He  and  Kendall  went  with  Jackson 
when  no  one  else  did,  and  they  were  the  leading 
spirits  in  the  government  of  the  country  until 
1840.  The  first  number  of  the  "Globe"  was 
issued  December  7,  1830.  Since  Blair  had  no 
capital,  the  paper  was  at  first  semi-weekly,  but 
Lewis  and  Kendall  brought  their  connections  to 
bear  on  the  office-holders  to  make  them  transfer 
1  Kendall's  Autobiography,  372. 


208  ANDREW  JACKSON 

their  subscriptions  from  the  "  Telegraph "  to  the 
"Globe."1  Parton  says  that  Jackson  compelled 
the  departments  to  give  Blair  their  printing. 

Mrs.  Eaton  accompanied  the  Jackson  party  to 
Tennessee  in  the  summer  of  1830.  Jackson  wrote 
to  Lewis,  July  28:  "The  ladies  of  the  place 
[Franklin]  had  received  Mrs.  Eaton  in  the  most 
friendly  manner,  and  has  extended  to  her  that 
polite  attention  due  to  her.  This  is  as  it  should 
be,  and  is  a  severe  comment  on  the  combination  at 
Nashville,  &  will  lead  to  its  prostration—  Until 
I  got  to  Tyre  Springs  I  had  no  conception  of  the 
combination  &  conspiracy  to  injure  &  prostrate 
Major  Eaton  —  and  injure  me  —  I  see  the  great 
Magicians  hand  in  all  this  —  and  what  mortifies 
me  more  is  to  find  that  this  combination  is  holding 
up  &  making  my  family  the  tools  to  injure  me, 
disturb  my  administration,  &  if  possible  to  betray 
my  friend  Major  Eaton.  This  will  recoil  upon 
their  own  heads  —  but  such  a  combination  I  am 
sure  never  was  formed  before,  and  that  my  Nephew 
&  Nece  should  permit  themselves  to  be  held  up  as 
the  instruments,  &  tools,  of  such  wickedness,  is 
truly  mortifying  to  me  —  I  was  pleadsed  to  see 
the  marked  attention  bestowed  upon  the  Major  & 
his  family  on  their  journey  hither  and  the  secrete 
plans  engendered  at  the  city  &  concluded  here,  & 
practised  upon  by  some  of  my  connections  have 
been  prostrated  by  the  independant,  &  virtuous 
portion  of  this  community  —  "2  Such  was  the 
1  40  NUes,  318.  2  Ford 


DISRUPTION  OF  THE  CABINET  209 

persistence  with  which  he  pursued  this  matter,  and 
such  the  way  in  which  he  intertwined  it  with  the 
interests  and  prerogatives  of  his  high  office.  His 
sycophants  and  flatterers  practiced  on  his  passion- 
ate zeal  in  it. 

The  quarrel  between  the  President  and  the  Vice- 
President  did  not  become  known  until  the  end  of 
the  year  1830.  Adams  first  refers  to  it  in  his 
diary  under  date  of  December  22,  1830.  Niles 
mentions  it  as  a  rumor,  January  29,  1831.  In 
February,  1831,  Calhoun  published  a  large  pam- 
phlet about  the  whole  matter.1  The  next  thing 
for  his  enemies  to  do  was  to  get  his  three  friends, 
Ingham,  Branch,  and  Berrien,  out  of  the  cabinet. 
To  this  end  those  who  were  in  the  secret  resigned, 
as  a  means  of  breaking  up  the  cabinet  and  forcing 
a  reconstruction.  Barry  was  asked  to  remain  in 
his  office.  Eaton  resigned  first,  April  7,  1831. 
Van  Buren  resigned  April  11,  1831,  in  a  letter 
which  was  so  oracular  that  no  one  could  understand 
it.2  The  main  ideas  in  his  letter  of  resignation 
and  in  Jackson's  reply  were :  —  (1)  That  Jackson 
did  not  intend  to  have  any  one  in  his  cabinet  who 
was  a  candidate  for  the  succession.  This  indicated 
Van  Buren  as  such  a  candidate.  (2)  That  the 
cabinet  was  originally  a  "  unit,"  and  that  Jackson 
wanted  to  keep  his  cabinet  a  unit.  This  hint  had 
no  effect  on  the  other  secretaries.  "I  found  in 
my  first  cabinet,"  wrote  Jackson,  in  1841,  "  des- 
semblers,  &  hypocrites."  He  suggests  that  Ber- 
i  40  NUes,  11.  2  40  Niles,  145. 


210  ANDREW  JACKSON 

rien  was  the  worst.1  The  ministers  wanted  to  be 
dismissed,  and  a  separate  quarrel  was  necessary  in 
the  case  of  each.  It  was  in  this  connection  that 
the  Peggy  O'Neil  affair  2  and  all  the  old  misunder- 
standing about  the  Seminole  war  came  to  a  public 
discussion.  Van  Buren  was  appointed  minister  to 
England,  and  he  went  out.  At  the  next  session 
of  Congress  a  great  political  conflict  arose  over  his 
confirmation.  When  McLane  was  sent  out  to 
England,  in  1829,  he  had  instructions  from  Van 
Buren  to  reopen  the  negotiations  about  the  West 
India  trade,  and,  as  a  basis  for  so  doing,  to  point 
out  to  the  English  government  that  the  party 
which  had  brought  that  question  into  the  position 
in  which  it  then  stood  had  been  condemned  by  the 
people  at  the  election.  This  introduced  the  inter- 
nal party  contests  of  the  country  into  diplomacy, 
and  instead  of  representing  this  nation  to  foreign 
nations  as  a  unit,  having,  for  all  its  international 
relations,  a  continuous  and  consistent  life,  it  invited 
foreigners  to  note  party  changes  here,  as  if  they 
had  to  negotiate  at  one  time  with  one  American 
nation,  and  at  another  time  with  another.  The 
fact  that  Van  Buren  had  given  these  instructions 
was  alleged  as  a  reason  for  not  confirming  his  ap- 
pointment, but  the  debate  took  a  wide  range.  His 
confirmation  was  defeated  by  the  casting  vote  of 
Calhoun.  This  check  to  Jackson's  plans  gave  just 

1  Ford  MSS. 

2  Webster  knew  of   that  affair  and  its  political  bearings  in 
January,  1830.     1  Correspondence,  483. 


DISRUPTION   OF  THE  CABINET  211 

the  requisite  spur  of  personal  pique  to  his  desire 
to  make  Van  Buren  President,  and  he  pursued 
that  purpose  from  this  time  on  with  all  his  powers. 
He  was  enraged  at  the  Senate.  The  "  Globe " 
proposed  to  reduce  the  term  of  senators  to  two 
years,  and  to  take  from  the  Senate  the  power  to 
confirm  appointments.1  It  was  in  the  debate  on 
Van  Buren's  confirmation  that  William  L.  Marcy 
cynically  avowed  the  doctrine:  "To  the  victors 
belong  the  spoils." 

Jackson  found  that  women  are  the  arbiters  in 
certain  social  matters,  and  that  men,  no  matter 
how  great  or  domineering  they  may  be,  have  no 
resources  by  which  to  overrule  their  prerogative. 
He  was  defeated.  His  interference  had  done  only 
far  greater  harm  to  the  person  he  had  tried  to  be- 
friend. He  gave  her  an  unenviable,  unavoidable, 
yet  probably  undeserved  place  in  history.  Eaton 
was  in  a  state  of  ungovernable  rage  at  the  discussion 
of  his  wife's  reputation  by  the  newspapers  from  one 
end  of  the  country  to  the  other.  He  challenged 
Campbell,  one  of  the  clergymen  mentioned  above 
as  prominent  in  connection  with  the  scandal.  June 
18,  1831,  he  challenged  Ingham,  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury.  Ingham  declined  to  fight.  A  few  days 
later  Ingham  complained  to  Jackson  that  he  had 
been  waylaid  and  hindered  in  his  duties  by  Eaton, 
Lewis,  Randolph,  and  others.  They  denied  that 
they  had  molested  him,  or  had  intended  to  do 

1  41  Niles,  444 ;  an  editorial  exposing  the  folly  of  the  complaints 
and  anger. 


212  ANDREW  JACKSON 

so.1  Jackson's  plan  had  been  that  Hugh  L.  White, 
senator  from  Tennessee,  should  resign,  and  that 
Eaton  should  take  his  place.  White  was  to  be 
Secretary  of  War.2  White,  however,  who  perhaps 
was  piqued  that  he  was  not  made  Secretary  of 
War  in  1829,  declined  to  fulfil  his  share  of  this 
programme.  He  became  alienated  from  Jackson. 
Eaton  was  made  Governor  of  Florida.  From  1836 
to  1840  he  was  minister  to  Spain.  Parton  says 
that  he  quarrelled  with  Jackson,  and  was  a  whig 
in  1840.3  He  died  in  1856.  Mrs.  Eaton  died 
about  1878. 

The  new  cabinet  was  :  Edward  Livingston,  of 
Louisiana,  Secretary  of  State ;  Louis  McLane,  of 
Delaware,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury ;  Lewis  Cass, 
of  Michigan,  Secretary  of  War ;  Levi  Woodbury, 
of  New  Hampshire  (who  had  given  up  to  Hill  his 
place  in  the  Senate),  Secretary  of  the  Navy ;  Roger 
B.  Taney,  of  Maryland,  Attorney-General.  Adams 
mentions  a  story  that  the  War  Department  was 
offered  to  William  Drayton,  leader  of  the  Union 
party  of  South  Carolina.4  This  cabinet  was  a 
"unit,"  and  a  unit  for  Jackson  and  the  successor 
on  whom  he  had  determined. 

We  have  now  brought  the  intimate  and  per- 
sonal history  of  Jackson's  first  administration 
down  to  the  time  when  the  campaign  for  his  re- 
election opened.  We  have  seen  how  Jackson  con- 

l  40  Niles,  302.  2  Hunt's  Livingston,  358. 

8  3  Parton,  368,  639.     See  also  below,  page  273. 
4  9  Adams,  132. 


THE  NEW  CABINET  213 

strued  the  presidential  office  in  its  immediate  bear- 
ings, and  how  he  addressed  himself  to  its  imme- 
diate and  personal  duties.  We  turn  now  to  the 
public  questions  and  measures  of  his  first  admin- 
istration. 


CHAPTER  VIH 

PUBLIC    QUESTIONS   OF  JACKSON'S   FIRST  ADMINIS- 
TRATION 

I.  The  trade  between  the  United  States  and  the 
British  West  Indies  had  been  a  source  of  irri- 
tation and  dissatisfaction  ever  since  the  United 
States  had  been  independent.  After  independence 
the  United  States  desired  to  obtain  a  commercial 
treaty  which  would  enable  them  to  trade  with  the 
British  West  Indies  as  they  always  had  done. 
This  the  English  resented  as  an  effort  to  retain 
the  benefits  of  being  in  the  empire  after  leaving  it. 
The  Americans  therefore  employed  in  that  trade 
the  illicit  methods  which  they  had  developed  into  a 
high  art  in  trade  with  the  non-British  West  Indies 
before  the  Revolution.  After  the  second  war  the 
question  was  reopened.  The  English  had  hardly 
yet  lost  faith  in  the  Navigation  System,  and  the 
Americans  had  adopted  it  as  far  as  it  would  apply 
to  a  State  with  no  colonies  beyond  the  sea.  As  the 
diplomatic  efforts  for  a  treaty  failed,  resort  was 
had  by  the  United  States  to  retaliatory  measures. 
These  had  their  inevitable  effect.  The  two  coun- 
tries, respectively,  advanced  step  by  step  into  a 
dead-lock,  from  which  the  only  issue  was  that 


McLANE'S  MISSION  215 

one  side  or  the  other  must  recede.  This  point  was 
reached  in  1827.  The  opposition  in  the  United 
States  made  capital  out  of  the  entanglement.  In 
the  mean  time  the  illicit  trade  went  merrily  on, 
and  the  smuggler  rectified,  in  his  way,  the  folly  of 
statesmen.  Thus  the  matter  stood  when  Jackson 
was  elected.  Gallatin  said  that  "if  he  had  hinted 
to  the  Canning  ministry  that  their  course  concern- 
ing the  colonial  trade  would  promote  the  election 
of  Jackson,  they  would  have  given  up  the  point."  * 
One  of  his  first  acts  was  to  send  McLane  to 
England  to  reopen  negotiations.  This  he  was  to  do 
by  pointing  to  the  result  of  the  election  as  a  rebuke 
to  the  former  administration,  which  had  brought 
about  the  dead-lock.  Pending  the  negotiations  an 
act  of  Congress  was  passed,  May  29,  1830,  autho- 
rizing the  President  to  declare  the  retaliatory  acts 
of  1818, 1820,  and  1823  repealed,  whenever  Ameri- 
can ships  should  be  allowed  in  the  West  Indies  on 
the  same  terms  as  British  ships  arriving  there  from 
the  United  States,  and  when  they  should  be  allowed 
to  carry  goods  from  the  colonies  to  any  non-British 
ports  to  which  British  ships  might  go.  This  act  was 
sent  to  England.  Lord  Aberdeen  said  that  it  was 
all  that  England  had  ever  demanded.2  The  colonial 
duties  were  increased,  a  differential  duty  in  favor 
of  the  North  American  colonies  was  laid,  and  the 
trade  was  opened.  The  President  issued  his  pro- 
clamation October  5,  1830.  The  administration 
boasted  of  this  diplomatic  achievement.  The  truth 
i  8  Adams,  326.  2  39  Niles,  390  et  seq. 


216  ANDREW  JACKSON 

was  that  the  United  States  set  out  to  force  Eng- 
land to  let  American  goods  come  into  the  West 
Indies  on  the  same  footing  as  British  North  Ameri- 
can goods.  England  was  coerced  by  the  acts  of 
1818  and  1820.  Canning  said,  in  1826,  that  Eng- 
land had  yielded  to  coercion,  but  that  she  escaped 
from  it  as  soon  as  she  could.  By  way  of  escape  she 
opened  her  trade  to  all  the  world.  The  counter- 
vailing system  of  the  United  States,  then,  no  longer 
exercised  any  coercion,  and  the  United  States,  to 
get  the  trade  reopened,  abandoned  the  demands 
with  which  it  had  started  on  the  experiment  of 
countervailing.  This  last  step  was  what  the  Jack- 
son administration  had  accomplished.  Niles  and 
the  other  protectionists  scoffed  at  the  new  arrange- 
ment. They  said  that  the  illicit  trade  was  better 
than  the  new  arrangement.1  A  proof  that  this 
was  true  is  found  in  the  fact  that  the  illicit  trade 
went  on.  The  laws  forced  products  of  the  United 
States  to  reach  the  islands  through  Canada  and 
Nova  Scotia,  and  this  offered  just  so  much  pre- 
mium to  illicit  trade. 

II.  The  claims  of  the  United  States  for  spolia- 
tions against  France  and  against  all  those  states 
of  Europe  which  had  been  drawn  by  Napoleon 
into  his  continental  system,  had  been  a  subject  of 
fruitless  negotiation  ever  since  1815.2  Jackson 

1  39  Niles,  298 ;  42  Niles,  148.     N.  Y.  Advertiser  in  2  Pol.  Reg. 
444. 

2  For  succinct  statements  of  the  origin  and  history  of  these 
claims,  see   the   report  of  a  minority  of  the  committee   of  the 
House,  48  Niles,  6,  and  the  article  47  Niles,  455. 


TREATY  OF  PARIS  217 

took  up  these  claims  with  new  energy  and  spirit. 
He  sent  W.  C.  Kives  to  France  in  1829,  under 
instructions  which  covered  the  whole  history  of 
the  claims,  to  try  to  get  a  settlement.  In  his  mes- 
sage of  1829,  while  these  negotiations  were  pend- 
ing, Jackson  referred  to  the  claims  as  likely  to 
"  furnish  a  subject  of  unpleasant  discussion  and 
possible  collision."  This  reference  was  not  of  a 
kind  to  help  the  negotiations.  In  1830  a  revolu- 
tion put  Louis  Philippe  on  the  throne  under  a 
Constitution.  New  hopes  of  a  settlement  of  the 
claims  were  raised  by  this  turn  in  affairs.  A 
treaty  was  finally  signed  at  Paris,  July  4,  1831, 
by  which  France  agreed  to  pay  twenty-five  million 
francs,  and  the  United  States  agreed  to  pay  one 
and  a  half  million  francs,  in  final  settlement  of  all 
outstanding  claims  of  citizens  of  one  country  against 
the  government  of  the  other  country.  The  treaty 
was  ratified  February  2,  1832.  The  first  instal- 
ment became  due  February  2,  1833.  Claims 
against  the  other  states  of  the  old  continental 
league  of  Napoleon's  time  were  likewise  liquidated, 
and  payment  was  secured  during  Jackson's  ad- 
ministration. The  administration  derived  great 
credit  from  these  settlements.  There  was  a  great 
deal  more  in  the  matter  than  the  money.  Euro- 
pean nations,  which  had  similar  claims  against 
France,  had  secured  payment  soon  after  the  peace, 
but  the  claims  of  the  United  States  had  been 
neglected.  Payment  now  meant  a  concession  of 
consideration  and  respect  to  the  United  States,  and 


218  ANDREW  JACKSON 

the  people  felt  that  Jackson  had  won  this  for  the 
nation. 

III.  The  Authority  and  Organization  of  the 
Federal  Judiciary.  During  Adams's  adminis- 
tration the  Kentucky  men  made  several  attempts 
to  lead  the  opposition  party  to  measures  favorable 
to  them  in  their  conflicts  with  the  federal  judiciary, 
arising  from  the  "  relief  "  acts.  In  the  session  of 
1827-28  a  bill  was  introduced  to  regulate  the  pro- 
cedure of  the  federal  courts  in  the  new  States, 
which  had  been  admitted  since  the  passage  of 
the  laws  of  September  29,  1789,  and  May  8, 
1792,  which  regulated  the  procedure  of  the  federal 
courts.  To  this  bill  Kowan  of  Kentucky  proposed 
an  amendment  which  would  take  away  from  the 
federal  courts  the  power  to  modify  or  change  any 
of  the  rules  of  procedure,  or  any  of  the  forms  of 
writs  of  execution,  which  were  to  be  those  of  the 
State  in  which  the  court  was  sitting.1  If  this 
amendment  had  been  passed,  the  federal  courts 
would  not  have  been  allowed  to  change  rules  and 
forms,  but  the  State  Legislatures  would  have  had 
power  to  do  so,  and  the  federal  judiciary  would 
have  been  handed  over  to  State  control.  This 
amendment  was  adopted  by  the  Senate.  Webster, 
who  had  been  away,  returned  to  find  that  the 
whole  federal  judiciary  system  had  been  thrown 
into  confusion2  by  this  hasty  proposition,  which 
had  been  made  only  with  reference  to  some  of  the 
whims  of  Kentucky  relief  politics.  He  exposed 
i  Cf.  page  167.  a  7  Adams,  455. 


THE  JUDICIARY  219 

the  effects  of  the  bill.  It  was  recommitted  and 
recast,  establishing  for  the  new  States  the  proce- 
dure then  existing,  with  power  in  the  courts  to 
modify,  under  the  supervision  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  and  in  this  shape  was  passed. 

In  1830  an  attempt  was  made  to  repeal  the 
twenty-fifth  section  of  the  judiciary  act,  by  which 
the  Supreme  Court  is  empowered  to  pass  upon  the 
constitutionality  of  State  laws.  The  bill  was  lost 
in  the  House  by  the  vote  of  137  to  51,  but  the 
minority  consisted  of  some  of  the  leading  adminis- 
tration men.  In  1831  the  House  refused,  115  to 
61,  to  consider  a  resolution  instructing  the  judiciary 
committee  to  report  a  bill  setting  terms  of  years 
for  federal  judges.1  In  1830  Berrien,  the  Attorney- 
General,  gave  an  opinion  on  the  South  Carolina 
Police  Act,2  in  which  he  overturned  Wirt's  opinion. 
He  held  that  that  act  was  valid  because  it  was  an  act 
of  internal  police.  In  this  opinion  he  laid  down  the 
doctrine  of  the  extreme  Southern  State  rights  men 
about  the  limits  of  federal  power.  He  held  that 
the  federal  authorities  ought  not,  in  exercising  their 
powers,  to  make  laws  or  treaties  to  come  into  col- 
lision with  anything  which  the  States  had  done 
under  their  reserved  powers,  unless  it  was  neces- 
sary to  do  so.  The  admission  of  black  men  into 
the  State  was  only  convenient,  not  necessary ; 
hence  collision  on  that  point  would  be  improper.3 

The  Jackson  party  and  the  Executive  Depart- 

1  39  Niles,  405.  2  See  page  169. 

8  2  Opinions  of  the  Attorneys-General,  433. 


220  ANDREW  JACKSON 

ment  were  on  terms  of  jealousy  and  distrust  to- 
wards the  judiciary  for  several  years.  Another 
expression  of  these  feelings  was  the  impeachment 
of  Judge  Peck,  of  Missouri.  The  democrats  were 
especially  jealous  of  the  prerogative  powers  of  the 
courts ;  among  the  rest,  of  the  power  to  imprison 
for  contempt.  Peck  wrote  out  and  published  in  a 
newspaper,  in  1826,  a  decision  which  he  had  ren- 
dered. Lawless,  counsel  for  the  defeated  party, 
published  a  review  of  the  opinion.  Peck  impris- 
oned him  for  twenty-four  hours,  and  suspended 
him  from  practice  in  the  court  for  eighteen  months, 
for  contempt.  Lawless  petitioned  the  federal  House 
of  Representatives  during  three  sessions  for  redress, 
in  vain.  In  1829  the  democratic  House  impeached 
Peck.  Buchanan  was  the  leader.1  The  impeach- 
ment was  in  the  current  of  popular  feeling,  and 
there  was  capital  to  be  made  out  of  it.  January 
31,  1831,  the  vote  was,  21  to  convict,  22  to  acquit. 
Adams  says  that  Jackson  favored  acquittal,  lest 
Buchanan  should  gain  by  a  conviction,  just  as  Jef- 
ferson, in  Chase's  case,  favored  acquittal,  lest  John 
Randolph  should  gain  power  by  a  conviction.2  By 
an  act  of  March  2,  1831,  the  power  of  the  courts 
to  punish  at  discretion  for  contempt  was  limited 
to  cases  of  misbehavior  in  court,  or  so  near  to  the 
court  as  to  obstruct  the  administration  of  justice. 

IV.   The  Indians.  —  Georgia  continually  pressed 
the  federal  government  to  buy  off  the  Indian  title 

1  Charges  and  specifications,  38  Niles,  245.     Cf.,  also,  2  Ken- 
nedy's Wirt,  308.  2  8  Adams,  306. 


TREATY   OF  INDIAN   SPRING  221 

to  lands  in  that  State,  and  it  was  done  from  time 
to  time  for  certain  portions.  The  treaty  of  1802 
was  supposed  to  cover  Georgia's  claims  for  the  ex- 
penses of  the  Indian  wars  of  1793—94,  but  those 
claims  were  urged  until  1827,  when  Congress  voted 
$129,375  to  discharge  them.  At  the  urgent  solici- 
tation of  Georgia,  Monroe  appointed  two  commis- 
sioners to  treat  with  the  Creeks,  of  whose  lands 
nine  and  a  half  million  acres  were  still  under  the 
Indian  title.  The  lower  Creeks  were  then  on  the 
land  west  of  the  Flint  River,  and  north  of  31°  30', 
and  the  upper  Creeks  were  almost  entirely  in  Ala- 
bama, between  the  Coosa  River  and  che  Georgia 
boundary,  and  north  of  an  east  and  west  line 
through  the  Hickory  Ground  (Wetumpka).  These 
boundaries  were  set  by  Jackson's  treaty  with  the 
Creeks  of  1814,  and  he  guaranteed  to  them  the 
lands  which  were  then  left  to  them.1  The  Chero- 
kees  were  in  the  northwestern  corner  of  Georgia, 
the  northeastern  corner  of  Alabama,  and  the  south- 
eastern corner  of  Tennessee,  between  the  Chatta- 
hoochee,  the  Etowah,  and  the  Hiwasee  rivers.2  The 
Creeks  voted  to  put  to  death  any  one  who  should 
vote  to  sell  any  more  land,  and  refused  to  treat 
with  Monroe's  commissioners.  After  the  council 
broke  up,  a  few  chiefs,  headed  by  Mclntosh,  made 
the  treaty  of  Indian  Spring,  February  12,  1825, 
ceding  all  their  lands  in  Georgia  and  Alabama 

1  Folio  State  Papers,  1  Indian  Affairs,  827. 

2  An  excellent  map  of  the  Cherokee  territory  in  5  Bur.  Ethno* 

kgy. 


222  ANDREW  JACKSON 

for  1400,000.  The  Senate  confirmed  this  treaty, 
March  3,  1825.  April  30th  the  Creeks  set  Mcln- 
tosh's  house  on  fire,  and  shot  him  as  he  came  out. 
Governor  Troup  of  Georgia  claimed  the  lands 
for  Georgia  at  once,  and  began  to  survey  them. 
He  also  set  up  a  lottery  to  dispose  of  them.  Presi- 
dent Adams  appointed  an  agent  to  investigate  the 
negotiation  of  the  treaty.  The  agent  reported  that 
forty-nine  fiftieths  of  the  Creeks  repudiated  the 
treaty  as  a  fraud  on  them.  The  President  ordered 
General  Gaines  to  prevent  any  trespass  on  the  lands 
of  the  Indians,  and  pointed  out  to  Governor  Troup 
the  objections  to  his  proceedings.  Troup  blustered, 
and  asked  if  the  President  would  hold  himself  re- 
sponsible to  the  State  of  Georgia.  The  Georgia 
Legislature  did  not  sustain  the  Governor.  The 
treaty  of  Indian  Spring  was  annulled,  and  a  new 
one  was  made  in  January,  1826,  by  which  a  part  of 
the  lands  in  Georgia  were  ceded.  This  treaty  was 
not  confirmed,  and  another,  ceding  all1  the  lands 
in  Georgia,  was  finally  made,  as  Benton  says,  by 
appealing  to  the  cupidity  of  the  chiefs.  The  Mcln- 
tosh  party  got  an  indemnity,  and  a  large  sum  was 
given  to  the  chiefs.  Land  was  to  be  provided  west 
of  the  Mississippi  for  all  who  would  go  there. 
This  treaty  did  not  satisfy  the  Georgians.  Never- 
theless, inasmuch  as  by  the  last  treaty  all  the  lands 
in  Georgia  were  ceded,  and  by  the  second  treaty 
only  part  of  those  lands  were  ceded,  the  Georgians 
claimed  a  substantial  victory,2  although  not  all  the 
1  1  Benton,  59.  2  Hodgson,  141. 


TREATY  OF  INDIAN  SPRING  223 

lands  in  Georgia  and  Alabama  were  ceded,  as  by 
the  treaty  of  Indian  Spring.  The  Cherokees  still 
remained  undisturbed.  In  January,  1828,  the 
Georgia  Legislature  passed  a  set  of  resolutions, 
the  truculency  of  which  is  unparalleled,  demanding 
that  the  United  States  should  extinguish  the  title 
of  the  Cherokees.1 

The  Cherokees  were  the  most  civilized  of  the 
Gulf  Indians,  and  perhaps  they  had  reached  a 
higher  pitch  of  civilization  than  any  other  Indians 
have  ever  yet  reached.2  They  had  horses  and  cat- 
tle, goats,  sheep,  and  swine.  They  raised  maize, 
cotton,  tobacco,  wheat,  oats,  and  potatoes,  and 
traded  with  their  products  to  New  Orleans.  They 
had  gardens,  and  apple  and  peach  orchards.  They 
had  built  roads,  and  they  kept  inns  for  travellers. 
They  manufactured  cotton  and  wool ;  though  prob- 
ably these  were  very  poor  in  their  way.  Their  num- 
bers were  increasing.  In  1825  there  were  13,563, 
besides  220  resident  whites  and  1,277  slaves,  in  the 
Cherokee  country.  One  of  their  number  had  in- 
vented an  alphabet  for  their  language.  They  had 
a  civil  government,  imitated  from  that  of  the 
United  States.  The  Chickasaws  had  ten  mills  and 
fifty  workshops.  They  lived  in  the  northeast  cor- 
ner of  Mississippi.  They  numbered  4,000,  and 
were  increasing.  The  Choctaws,  in  Central  Mis- 
sissippi, numbered  21,000,  and  ranked  next  to  the 
Cherokees  in  civilization.  The  Creeks  numbered 
40,000,  and  were  the  lowest  in  civilization.  The 

1  3  Ann.  Reg.,  Local  History,  143.  2  3  Ann.  Eeg.  77. 


224  ANDREW  JACKSON 

money  paid  them  for  their  lands  had  debauched 
them.  The  facts  were  that  the  Indians  had  reached 
a  certain  grade  of  civilization,  that  they  were  in- 
creasing in  numbers,  and  that  they  were  forming 
civilized  and  Christian  bodies;  and  it  was  these 
very  facts  which  made  all  the  trouble,  for  they  all 
led  to  the  probability  that  the  Indians  would  re- 
main a  permanent  part  of  the  society,  and  would 
occupy  definite  areas  of  land  in  the  midst  of  the 
States.  It  certainly  was  a  home  question,  when,  in 
1829,  Jackson  asked  whether  Maine  or  New  York 
would  tolerate  an  Indian  state  within  her  own  civil 
limits.  Peter  B.  Porter,  Secretary  of  War  under 
Adams,  prepared  a  plan  for  an  Indian  territory 
west  of  the  Mississippi,  and  for  colonizing  the 
Gulf  Indians  in  it.  The  plan  was  referred  to  the 
next  administration.  Adams  made  himself  very 
unpopular  in  the  Southwest  by  his  action  to  pro- 
tect the  Indians.  He  did  not  get  a  vote  in  Georgia 
in  1828.  Jackson  had  abundantly  shown l  that  he 
held  the  Southwestern  white  man's  views  of  In- 
dians and  Indian  rights. 

As  soon  as  Jackson  was  elected,  December  20, 
1828,  Georgia  passed  a  law  extending  her  jurisdic- 
tion over  the  Cherokee  lands  and  dividing  them 
into  counties,  and  enacted  that  no  Indian  should 
testify  against  a  white  man.  In  1829  she  modified 
this  so  that  an  Indian  might  testify  against  a  white 
man  who  lived  in  the  Indian  territory.  In  1829 
Alabama,  and  in  1830  Mississippi,  passed  similar 
1  See  page  29. 


CIVILIZATION  OF  THE  INDIANS         225 

laws,  but  somewhat  milder.  The  new  administra- 
tion admitted  the  soundness  of  the  theory  of  these 
laws,  which  were  plainly  in  contravention  of  the 
treaties  made  with  the  Indians  by  the  federal  gov- 
ernment. In  his  message  of  1829  Jackson  said 
that  he  had  told  the  Indians  that  their  pretensions 
would  not  be  supported.  In  the  spring  of  1830 
Congress  passed  an  act  for  encouraging  and  facili- 
tating the  removal  of  the  Gulf  Indians  to  a  terri~ 
tory  set  apart  for  them  west  of  the  Mississippi. 

The  quarrel  between  Georgia  and  the  Indians 
had  now  narrowed  down  to  a  struggle  with  the 
Cherokees,  who  were  the  most  civilized,  and  who 
had  the  strongest  treaty  guarantees  from  the  fed- 
eral authority  for  their  territory  and  their  self-gov- 
ernment. It  was  proposed  to  test  the  proceedings  of 
Georgia  before  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States.  In  the  summer  of  1830,  Judge  Clayton, 
a  Georgia  State  judge,  charged  the  grand  jury 
that  he  intended  to  allow  no  case  to  be  withdrawn 
from  his  jurisdiction  by  any  foreign  authority,  but 
that  he  should  enforce  the  State  laws  about  the 
Indians,  and  he  wanted  to  know  whether  he  was  to 
be  supported  by  the  people.1  The  first  test  arose 
on  a  murder  case  against  George  Tassel,  a  Chero- 
kee, for  killing  another  Cherokee.  The  Superior 
Court  of  Hall  County  tried,  convicted,  and  sen- 
tenced him.  The  Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  issued  a  citation  to  the 
State  of  Georgia,  December  12,  1830,  to  appear 
i  39  Niles,  99. 


226  ANDREW  JACKSON 

and  show  cause,  in  answer  to  a  writ  of  error,  why 
the  sentence  against  Tassel  should  not  be  corrected.1 
Governor  Gilmer  laid  this  document  before  the 
Legislature,  which  ordered  him  to  disregard  it,  and 
to  resist  by  force  any  attempt  to  interfere  with  the 
criminal  law  of  the  State.  On  the  28th  of  Decem- 
ber Tassel  was  hung. 

The  Governor  of  Georgia  called  on  the  Presi- 
dent to  withdraw  the  federal  troops,  and  to  leave 
Georgia  to  deal  with  the  Indians  and  gold-diggers. 
The  President  complied.  The  Georgia  militia 
marched  in,  and  complaints  from  the  Indians  at 
once  began  to  be  heard.  The  President  refused 
to  enforce  the  treaty  rights  of  the  Indians.  The 
Gherokees  applied  to  the  Supreme  Court  for  an 
injunction  to  prevent  Georgia  from  interfering  with 
their  treaty  rights.  In  January,  1831,  the  court, 
while  in  effect  sustaining  the  claims  and  rights  of 
the  Cherokees,  declared  that  the  remedy  prayed 
for  could  not  be  employed.  What  was  needed 
was  not  a  judicial  but  a  political  remedy.2  The 
political  remedy  belonged  to  the  Executive  and 
the  President  had  refused  to  use  it. 

Georgia  ordered  all  white  residents  of  the  Cher- 
okee country  to  obtain  State  licenses,  and  to  take 
an  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  State.  Two  mission- 
aries, sent  out  by  a  Boston  society,  Worcester  and 
Butler,  amongst  others,  did  not  comply  with  this 
law.  They  were  arrested,  but  were  at  first  re- 
leased, under  the  belief  that  they  were  disbursing 
1  39  Niles,  338.  2  5  Peters,  1. 


GEORGIA  AND  THE  FEDERAL  AUTHORITY  227 

agents  of  the  federal  government.  The  author- 
ities at  Washington  denied  that  they  were  such. 
Thereupon  they  were  rearrested,  tried,  convicted, 
and  condemned  to  four  years'  hard  labor  in  the 
penitentiary.  In  sentencing  them  Judge  Clay- 
ton made  another  stump  speech.1  On  a  writ  of 
error  in  1832,  the  Supreme  Court  held  that  the 
law  under  which  these  men  were  convicted  was 
unconstitutional,  that  the  laws  of  Georgia  about 
the  Cherokees  contravened  federal  treaties  and 
were  void,  and  ordered  that  the  men  be  released.2 
Georgia  refused  to  obey.  The  Georgia  doctrine 
seemed  to  be  that  all  three  departments  of  the 
federal  government  must  concur  in  holding  a 
State  law  to  be  unconstitutional  in  order  to  set 
it  aside.3  Jackson  refused  to  take  any  executive 
action  to  give  force  to  the  decision  of  the  court. 
The  presidential  election  was  at  hand,  and  he  said 
that  he  would  submit  his  conduct  to  the  people, 
who  could  at  the  election  show  whether  they  ap- 
proved or  disapproved  of  his  refusal  to  sustain  the 
decision.4  No  case  could  more  distinctly  show  the 
vice  of  the  political  philosophy  which  Jackson  pro- 
fessed. Twelve  persons  in  all  were  convicted,  in 
Georgia,  of  illegal  residence  in  the  Indian  country. 


i  41  Niles,  174.  *  6  Peters>  515.  8  9  Adams,  548. 

4  Greeley  has  a  story  that  Jackson  said,  "  John  Marshall  has 
made  his  decision.  Now  let  him  enforce  it."  1  Greeley,  106. 
Jackson  disliked  Marshall,  although  h*  had  no  active  enmity 
against  him.  Scarcely  two  men  could  be  found  less  likely  to  ap- 
preciate each  other  personally  or  politically. 


228  ANDREW  JACKSON 

All  were  pardoned.1  The  missionaries  refused  at 
first  to  accept  a  pardon.  In  January,  1833,  they 
withdrew  their  suit  in  the  Supreme  Court,  and 
were  released.2 

In  1833  Alabama  came  into  collision  with  the 
federal  government  on  account  of  Indians.  Fed- 
eral troops  were  employed  to  expel  intruders  from 
the  Indian  territory.  In  executing  this  duty  they 
killed  one  Owens.  The  State  authorities  attempted 
to  try  for  murder  the  soldiers  through  whose  action 
the  man  met  his  death.  The  military  authorities 
would  not  consent.  The  federal  government,  taught 
by  nullification,  took  a  firmer  position  than  in  the 
case  of  Georgia.  By  a  compromise,  the  reservation 
was  made  smaller,  and  the  white  intruders  were 
allowed  to  buy  titles  from  the  Indians.3 

In  September,  1830,  a  treaty  was  negotiated  at 
Dancing  Rabbit  Creek  with  the  Choctaws,  over 
whom  Mississippi  had  extended  her  laws,  by  which 
they  ceded  their  lands  and  went  west  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi. They  were  to  be  provided  with  land, 
transportation,  houses,  tools,  a  year's  subsistence, 
150,000  for  schools,  820,000  a  year  for  twenty 
years,  $250  during  twenty  years  for  each  one  of 
four  chiefs,  and  $500  for  another,  as  president, 
should  such  an  officer  be  chosen.  When  this  treaty 
was  before  the  Senate  for  ratification  the  preamble 
was  stricken  out,  because  it  recited  that  "  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States  has  said  that  he  cannot 

i  7  Ann.  Reg.  265.  2  43  Niles,  419. 

»  45  Niles,  155;  Hodgson,  179. 


REMOVAL  OF  THE  GULF  INDIANS        229 

protect  the  Choctaw  people  from  the  operation  of 
these  laws "  of  Mississippi.1  During  the  next 
eight  years  the  tribes  were  all  half  persuaded,  half 
forced,  to  go.  The  Indian  Territory  was  roughly 
defined  by  an  act  of  June  30,  1834.  Part  of  the 
Cherokees  had  gone  in  1818,  because  they  wanted 
to  follow  their  old  mode  of  life.  In  1836  all  the 
rights  of  the  Cherokees  east  of  the  Mississippi  were 
bought  for  five  million  dollars  and  the  expenses  of 
removal.2  In  the  same  year  the  Creeks  broke  into 
hostilities,  and  were  forced  to  migrate.  The  civil- 
ized Cherokees  migrated  in  1838. 

V.  Public  Lands.  Various  plans  for  dealing 
with  the  lands  had  been  proposed  previous  to  Jack- 
son's accession.  One  was  that  the  States  should 
seize  the  lands  by  virtue  of  their  "sovereignty." 
This  short  and  easy  method  recommended  itself  to 
the  politicians  of  the  emphatic  and  metaphysical 
school.  It  meant  simply  that  the  first  settlers 
should  buy  some  land,  organize  a  State,  and  get 
"  sovereignty,"  and  then  take  possession  of  the  rest 
of  the  land  within  the  civil  jurisdiction.  Another 
plan  was  to  sell  to  the  States  at  a  nominal  price. 
Another :  to  sell  all  the  land  at  graduated  prices, 
for  what  it  would  bring.  Another :  to  give  the  land 
to  actual  settlers  (since  realized  in  the  homestead 

1  40  Niles,  106. 

2  50  Niles,  265.    In  1886  there  were  3,000  Indians  (of  whom 
2,000  were  full-blood  Cherokees)  on  a  reservation  of  100,000  acres, 
in  their  old  home.     (Eastern  Band  of  Cherokee  Indians  vs.  U.  S. 
and  Cherokee  Nation  in  Sup.  Ct.  U.  S.  Ind.  Comm.  Rep.  1886, 
208,  404.) 


230  ANDREW  JACKSON 

law).  Another:  to  use  the  lands  as  a  fund  for 
internal  improvements  and  education  (since  re- 
alized in  the  railroad  subsidies  and  agricultural 
college  land  grants).  It  is  plain  that  if  the  fed- 
eral government  buys  territory  by  treaties  like  those 
of  Louisiana  and  Florida,  and  surveys  the  lands, 
and  maintains  civil  institutions  over  all  the  terri- 
tory, and  then  gives  the  lands  away,  what  it  gives 
is  the  outlay  necessary  to  bring  the  land  to  the 
point  where  a  civilized  man  can  begin  to  use  it. 
Of  course  the  new  States  wanted  population,  and 
were  eager  that  the  federal  government  should  en- 
courage immigration  by  making  this  outlay  and 
giving  away  the  product  of  it.  To  September  30, 
1832,  the  lands  had  cost  $49,700,000,!  and  the 
total  revenue  received  from  them  had  amounted  to 
$38,300,000.  The  notion  that  the  Union  possessed, 
in  its  unoccupied  lands,  a  great  estate,  or  an  asset 
of  great  value,  was  a  delusion.  It  was  only  a 
form  of  the  still  wider  social  delusion  that  raw  land 
is  a  "  boon  of  nature,"  with  which  the  human  race, 
through  its  individual  members,  is  endowed. 

The  old  States,  especially  the  tariff  States,  then 
saw  distinctly  the  relation  of  the  lands  to  the  tariff. 
Everything  which  enhanced  the  attractiveness  of 
the  land,  and  made  it  easier  to  get  at  it,  was  just 
so  much  force  drawing  the  man  who  had  no  land 
and  no  capital  away  from  the  old  States  and  out 
of  the  wages  class.  Every  improvement  in  trans- 
portation ;  every  abolition  of  taxes  and  restrictions 

1  Round  numbers ;  the  five  right  hand  figures  disregarded. 


POLITICAL  ECONOMY  OF  LAND  231 

like  the  corn  laws,  which  kept  American  agricul- 
tural products  out  of  England,  every  reduction  in 
the  price  of  land,  increased  the  chances  of  the 
man  who  had  nothing  to  become  by  industry  and 
economy  an  independent  land-owner.  The  capi- 
talist employer  in  the  old  States  was  forced  to 
offset  this  attractiveness  of  the  land  by  raising 
wages.  This  of  course  is  the  reason  why  wages  in 
the  United  States  are  high,  and  why  no  wages  class 
has  ever  yet  been  distinctly  differentiated  here.  It 
might  justly  be  argued  that  it  was  improper  for  the 
federal  government  to  raise  funds  by  taxation  on 
the  old  States,  and  to  expend  them  in  buying,  sur- 
veying, and  policing  wild  land,  and  then  to  give 
the  land  away  to  either  "  the  poor "  or  the  rich ; 
but  the  protectionists  distinctly  faced  the  issue 
which  was  raised  for  their  pet  dogma,  and  de- 
manded that  the  lands  should  not  be  surveyed  and 
sold  abundantly  and  cheaply,  but  should  be  kept 
out  of  the  market.  The  effect  of  this  would  be  to 
prevent  the  population  from  spreading  thinly  over 
the  whole  continent,  to  make  it  dense  in  the  old 
States,  to  raise  the  value  and  rent  of  land  there,  to 
produce  a  class  dependent  on  wages,  i.  e.,  a  supply 
of  labor,  and  to  keep  wages  down.  At  the  same 
time  all  the  taxes  on  clothing,  furniture,  and  tools 
would  reduce  the  net  return  of  the  agriculturist 
and  lower  the  attractiveness  of  the  land.  Lower 
wages  would  then  suffice  to  hold  the  laborer  in  the 
East.  These  two  lines  of  legislation  would  there- 
fore be  consistent  and  support  each  other;  but  they 


232  ANDREW  JACKSON 

were  sorely  unjust  to  the  man  who  had  nothing 
with  which  to  fight  the  battle  of  life  save  his  stout 
hands  and  his  good-will  to* work. 

The  free-trade  States  of  the  South  and  the 
free-land  States  of  the  West,  therefore,  fell  most 
naturally  into  the  "  coalition  "  which  the  tariff  men 
and  national  republicans  denounced.  The  latter 
said  that  the  Southerners  had  agreed  to  surrender 
the  lands  to  the  West  as  a  price  for  the  assistance 
of  the  West  against  the  Eastern  States  and  the 
tariff.1  The  sudden  and  unaccountable  popularity 
of  Jackson  in  rural  Pennsylvania  threw  that  State, 
in  spite  of  the  tariff  interests  of  her  capitalists, 
into  the  combination  to  which  Jackson  belonged 
sectionally,  and  the  ambitious  politicians  of  New 
York,  seeing  the  need  of  joining  Jackson,  brought 
as  much  as  they  could  of  that  State  to  his  support. 
These  combinations  constituted  the  Jackson  party, 
in  regard  to  the  incoherency  of  whose  elements 
something  has  been  said  and  more  will  appear. 
Clay  was  operating  his  political  career  through 
tariff  and  internal  improvements,  with  the  lands 
as  a  fund  for  colonization,  canals,  roads,  and  educa- 
tion. This  gave  him  no  strength  in  the  West,  and 
he  could  not  break  Jackson's  phalanx  in  Penn- 
sylvania, where  his  own  policy  should  have  made 
him  strong.  Hence  he  never  could  consolidate  a 
party.  Benton  antagonized  Clay  in  the  West  by 
taking  up  the  policy  of  free  lands. 

In  January  and  February,  1829,  Illinois  and 
1  9  Adams,  235. 


FOOT'S  RESOLUTIONS  233 

Indiana  adopted  resolutions  questioning  the  right 
of  the  federal  government  to  the  lands  in  those 
States.  They  did  not  adopt  the  Georgia  tone,  but 
they  seemed  disposed  to  adopt  the  Georgia  policy 
in  case  of  a  disagreement  with  the  federal  govern- 
ment. 

Jackson  had  no  settled  policy  in  regard  to  Iand0 
In  his  first  message  he  favored  distribution  of  the 
surplus  revenue  among  the  States,  so  soon  as  the 
debt  should  be  paid. 

December  29,  1829,  Foot,  of  Connecticut,  offered 
in  the  Senate  a  resolution  that  the  Committee  on 
Public  Lands  should  inquire  into  the  expediency 
of  restricting  sales  of  land  to  what  still  remained 
unsold  at  the  minimum  price,  i.  e.,  the  areas  which 
up  to  that  time  had  been  put  upon  the  market. 
It  was  in  the  debate  on  this  resolution  that  Webster 
and  Hayne  became  involved  in  their  famous  argu- 
ment on  the  theory  of  the  confederation.  Benton 
introduced  a  bill  for  selling  the  lands  at  graduated 
prices,  so  that  those  remaining  unsold  at  fl.25 
should  not  be  reserved,  but  sold  at  lower  prices, 
after  they  had  been  three  years  on  the  market. 
The  Senate  passed  this  bill  May  7,  1830.  It  was 
not  acted  on  in  the  House. 

In  January,  1831,  the  subject  came  up  again  in 
the  House,  on  an  appropriation  for  surveys,1  and 
produced  a  long  debate,  in  which  all  the  views  of 
the  question  were  represented.  In  his  annual  re- 
port for  1831,  McLane,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
1  6  Ann.  Reg.  81. 


234  ANDREW  JACKSON 

proposed  that  the  lands  should  be  sold  to  the 
States  in  which  they  lay  at  a  fair  price,  and  that 
the  sum  thus  obtained  should  be  divided  amongst 
the  States.  March  22,  1832,  Bibb  moved,1  in 
the  Senate,  that  the  Committee  on  Manufactures 
should  report,  as  a  preliminary  to  the  consideration 
of  the  tariff,  on  the  expediency  of  reducing  the 
price  of  the  lands,  and  also  on  the  expediency  of 
surrendering  the  lands  to  the  States.  Clay  reported 
from  that  committee  against  both  propositions, 
and  in  favor  of  giving  ten  per  cent  of  the  proceeds 
of  the  lands  to  the  new  States,  in  addition  to  what 
they  were  already  entitled  to,  and  dividing  the 
residue  among  all  the  States.  Clay's  report  was 
referred  to  the  Committee  on  Public  Lands,  which 
reported,  May  18th,  adversely  to  his  propositions, 
and  recommended  a  minimum  price  of  $1.00 ;  lands 
remaining  unsold  at  that  price  for  five  years  to  be 
then  sold  for  fifty  cents ;  fifteen  per  cent  of  the 
proceeds  to  be  divided  amongst  the  new  States. 
No  action  was  taken  on  account  of  the  disagreement 
of  the  two  Houses,  but  the  administration,  by  its 
attitude  on  the  land  question,  gained  strength  in 
the  Western  States  for  the  presidential  election  of 
1832. 

VI.  Internal  Improvements.  Jackson,  in  his  first 
message,  indicated  hostility  to  the  general  policy 
of  internal  improvements,  and  favored  distribu- 
tion. May  27,  1830,  he  vetoed  a  bill  for  sub- 
scription, by  the  United  States,  to  the  stock  of  the 

^       J  7  Ann.  Reg.  57. 


VETO  OF  THE  MAYSVILLE  ROAD        235 

Maysville  and  Lexington  road.1  In  his  veto  mes- 
sage he  placed  himself  on  the  constitutional  doc- 
trine of  Madison  and  Monroe.  The  local  and  po- 
litical interests  which  had  become  involved  in  the 
system  at  this  time  were  very  numerous  and  very 
strong.  The  evil  of  special  legislation  was  grow- 
ing. Politicians  and  interested  speculators  com- 
bined to  further  each  other's  interests  at  the 
public  expense.  Jackson  affronted  the  whole  in- 
terest ;  one  would  say  that  he  affronted  it  boldly, 
if  it  were  not  that  he  acted  with  such  spontaneous 
will  and  disregard  of  consequences  that  there  was 
no  conscious  exercise  of  courage.  He  was  not  able 
to  put  an  end  to  the  abuse,  but  he  curtailed  it. 
He  used  the  exceptional  strength  of  his  political 
position  to  do  what  no  one  else  would  have  dared  to 
do,  in  meeting  a  strong  and  growing  cause  of  cor- 
ruption. He  held  a  bill  for  the  Louisville  canal, 
and  another  for  light-houses,  over  the  session,  and 
then  returned  them  unsigned.  At  the  session  of 
1830—31  a  bill  for  improvements  was  passed  by 
such  majorities  that  a  veto  was  useless.  In  1831- 
32  Jackson  signed  one  such  bill  and  "  pocketed  " 
another.  In  the  session  of  1832-33  an  internal 
improvement  bill  was  defeated  by  parliamentary 
tactics.  In  the  message  of  1832  Jackson  recom- 
mended the  sale  of  all  the  stocks  held  by  the 
United  States  in  canals,  turnpikes,  etc.  He  edu- 

1  This  road  was  to  run  through  the  strongest  Jackson  district 
in  Kentucky.  (Clay  to  Webster.  1  Webster's  Correspondence, 
501.) 


236  ANDREW  JACKSON 

cated  his  party,  for  that  generation  at  least,  up  to 
a  position  of  party  hostility  to  special  legislation 
of  every  kind. 

VII.  Tariff.  In  1825  Huskisson  brought  for- 
ward the  first  reforms  in  the  system  of  taxation  in 
England.  His  propositions,  viewed  from  to-day's 
stand-point,  seem  beggarly  enough,  but  at  that 
time  they  seemed  revolutionary.  He  reduced  taxes 
on  raw  materials,  chemicals,  dye-stuffs,  and  mate- 
rials of  industry.  Raw  wool  was  reduced  from 
sixpence  to  a  penny  and  a  half  penny  per  pound, 
according  to  quality.  After  the  tariff  of  1824  was 
passed  by  Congress,  the  English  woollen  producers 
exported  some  of  their  cloths  to  this  country  in 
an  unfinished  state,  in  order  to  get  them  in  below 
the  minimum  (33^  cents),  and  then  had  them  fin- 
ished here.  They  also  sent  agents  to  this  country, 
to  whom  they  invoiced  their  cloths  below  the  open 
market  price. 

Every  one  of  the  above  statements,  as  will  be 
seen,  introduces  a  fact  which  affected  the  relations 
of  the  American  woollen  industry,  in  its  competi 
tion  with  the  English  woollen  industry,  in  a  way 
to  counteract  any  protection  by  the  tariff.  A 
number  of  persons  had  begun  the  manufacture  of 
woollens  because  the  federal  legislation  encouraged 
them  so  to  do,  not  because  they  understood  that 
business,  or  had  examined  the  industrial  condi- 
tions of  success  in  it.  They  were  pleased  to  con- 
sider Huskisson's  legislation  as  hostile  to  the 
United  States,  and  they  called  for  measures  to 


«  COUNTERVAILING  "  237 

countervail  it.  They  also  construed  as  fraud  the 
importation  of  unfinished  cloths,  and  the  practice 
of  invoicing  to  agents  at  manufacturer's  cost. 
The  "  American  system,"  therefore,  which  had 
already  changed  its  meaning  two  or  three  times, 
underwent  another  transformation.  It  now  meant 
to  countervail  and  offset  any  foreign  legislation, 
even  in  the  direction  of  freedom  and  reform,  or 
advance  in  civilization,  if  that  legislation  favored 
the  American  consumer. 

The  first  complaint  came  from  the  old  free-trade 
section.  After  1824  the  New  England  States, 
which  up  to  that  time  had  been  commercial  States, 
turned  to  manufactures.  They  had  resisted  all 
the  earlier  tariffs.  They  would  have  been  obliged 
to  begin  manufacturing,  tariff  or  no  tariff,  on  ac- 
count of  the  growing  density  of  the  population  ; 
but  there  was  force  in  Webster's  assertion,  in  re- 
ply to  Hayne,  that  New  England,  after  protesting 
against  the  tariff  as  long  as  she  could,  had  con- 
formed to  a  policy  forced  upon  the  country  by 
others,  and  had  embarked  her  capital  in  manufac- 
turing.1 October  23,  1826,  the  Boston  woollen 
manufacturers  petitioned  Congress  for  more  pro- 
tection.2 They  said  that  they  had  been  led,  by  the 
profits  of  the  English  woollen  industry  in  1824 
and  the  tariff  of  1824,  to  begin  manufacturing 
woollens,  confident  that  they  should  not  yield  to 
fair  competition,  and  that  such  competition  would 
be  secured  to  them  by  law.  They  went  on  to 
1  3  Webster's  Works,  305.  2  31  Niles,  145. 


238  ANDREW  JACKSON 

say  that  the  English  woollen  manufacturers  had 
glutted  the  market  in  England,  and  produced  dis- 
tress there,  which  had  reacted  on  this  country. 
They  said  that  they  could  not  be  relieved  "  with- 
out the  aid  of  their  national  government/' 

This  appeal  of  the  woollen  manufacturers 
brought  out  new  demands  from  other  quarters. 
Especially  the  wool-growers  came  forward.  They 
had  not  gained  anything  by  the  tariff.  A  few 
shrewd  men,  who  took  to  breeding  sheep  and  who 
sold  out  their  flocks  to  the  farmers  (who  were 
eager  buyers,  because  they  were  sure,  since  they 
had  a  protective  tax  in  their  favor,  that  they  were 
to  make  fortunes  out  of  wool),  won  by  the  tariff. 
No  one  else  did.  It  is  stated  that  the  woollen 
manufacturers  did  not  dare  to  ask  for  higher  duties 
in  1824,  because  they  feared  that  the  wool-growers 
would  only  demand  so  much  more.1  They  thought 
that  their  want  of  success  was  due  to  want  of 
experience  and  skill,  and  they  looked  to  make  im- 
provements. In  fact,  the  tax  on  wool  was  raised, 
in  1824,  more  than  that  on  woollens. 

January  10,  1827,  Mallary,  of  Vermont,  intro- 
duced the  "woollens  bill,"  for  "adjusting"  the 
tariff  on  wool  and  woollens.2  Niles  had  taken 
up  the  high  tariff  doctrine  ten  years  before,  and 
had  preached  it  in  his  "  Register "  assiduously. 
His  economic  notions  were  meagre  and  erroneous 
throughout,  and  he  had  absolutely  no  training. 
He  had  no  doubt,  however,  that  he  was  inculcating 
i  2  Ann.  Reg.  102.  «  31  NUes,  319. 


TARIFF  ON  COTTONS  AND    WOOLLENS     239 

the  rules  of  prosperity  and  wise  government.  He 
unquestionably  exerted  a  great  influence ;  for  he 
never  tired  of  his  labored  prescriptions  for  "  giving 
a  circulation  to  money,"  and  "  encouraging  indus- 
try." He  took  up  the  cause  of  the  woollen  men 
with  his  whole  heart.  Of  his  sincerity  and  dis- 
interestedness there  can  be  no  question.  To  him 
and  the  economists  and  statesmen  of  his  school  the 
minimum  seemed  to  be  a  marvellous  invention. 
Mallary  proposed  to  use  it  to  the  utmost.  He 
proposed  to  leave  the  rates  of  tax  unchanged,  but 
to  apply  them  on  and  between  minima  of  40  cents, 
12.50,  and  $4.00.  Cloth,  therefore,  which  cost  41 
cents  was  to  be  held  to  have  cost  $2.50,  and  the 
tax  on  it  was  to  be  62J  cents.  Wool  which  cost 
over  10  cents  was  to  be  held  to  have  cost  40  cents. 
The  duty  on  it  was  to  be  35  per  cent  for  a  year ; 
then  40  per  cent.  The  principle  now  proposed 
was,  therefore,  that  the  duties  should  advance  with 
time.  In  the  tariff  of  1816,  they  had  been  made 
to  decline  year  by  year.  The  woollens  bill  passed 
the  House,  106  to  95.  It  was  tabled  in  the  Senate 
by  the  casting  vote  of  Calhoun.  Calhoun  was 
forced  into  this  vote  by  a  manoeuvre  of  Van  Buren, 
who  "  dodged."  Calhoun  suffered,  in  consequence, 
in  Pennsylvania  and  New  York.  Politics  ran  very 
high  on  this  bill.  In  fact,  they  quite  superseded 
all  the  economic  interests.1  The  opposition  were 
afraid  of  offending  either  the  Pennsylvania  sup- 
porters of  Jackson,  or  the  southern  supporters  of 
i  31  Niles,  321 ;  33  Niles,  385. 


240  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Jackson.  Passion  began  now  to  enter  into  tariff 
discussion,  not  only  on  the  part  of  the  Southerners, 
but  also  between  the  wool  men  and  the  woollen 
men,  each  of  whom  thought  the  other  grasping, 
and  that  each  was  to  be  defeated  in  their  purpose 
by  the  other.  Niles  said  that  it  was  more  a  wool 
bill  than  a  woollens  bill,  and  the  woollen  men  were 
much  dissatisfied  with  it. 

May  14,  1827,  the  Pennsylvania  Society  for  the 
Promotion  of  Manufactures  and  the  Mechanic  Arts 
called  a  convention  of  wool  growers  and  manu- 
facturers. The  convention  met  at  Harrisburg, 
July  30,  1827.  It  was  found  necessary  to  enlarge 
the  scope  of  the  convention,  in  order  to  make  allies 
of  interests  which  would  otherwise  become  hostile. 
The  convention  adopted  the  plan  of  favoring  pro- 
tection on  everything  which  asked  for  it.  The 
result  was  that  iron,  steel,  glass,  wool,  woollens, 
hemp,  and  flax  were  recommended  for  protection. 
Louisiana  was  not  represented,  and  so  sugar  was 
left  out.  It  was  voted  to  discourage  the  importa- 
tion of  foreign  spirits  and  the  distillation  of  spirits 
from  foreign  products,  by  way  of  protection  to 
western  whiskey.  The  convention  proposed,  as  its 
idea  of  a  reasonable  and  proper  tax  on  wool  and 
woollens,  the  following:1  On  wool  which  cost  8 
cents  or  less  per  pound,  20  cents  per  pound  and  an 
advance  of  2|  cents  per  pound  per  annum  until  it 
should  be  50  cents ;  on  woollens,  four  minima  were 
proposed,  50  cents,  12.50,  14.00,  and  16.00,  on 
i  32  Niles,  388. 


TARIFF  CONVENTION  241 

which  the  tax  was  to  be  40  per  cent  for  a  year,  45 
per  cent  the  next  year,  and  50  per  cent  thereafter. 
The  minimum  on  cottons  was  to  be  raised  to  40 
cents. 

When  the  20th  Congress  met,  the  tariff  was  the 
absorbing  question.  Popular  interest  had  become 
engaged  in  it,  and  parties  were  to  form  on  it,  but 
it  perplexed  the  politicians  greatly.  Stevenson,  of 
Virginia,  an  anti-tariff  man,  was  chosen  Speaker. 
Adams  says  that  Stevenson  won  votes  by  promising 
to  make  a  committee  favorable  to  the  tariff.1  Ste- 
venson put  Mallary  at  the  head  of  the  committee, 
but  he  put  an  anti-tariff  majority  behind  him.  The 
"  Annual  Register "  2  stated  the  foreign  trade  of 
the  country  then  as  follows :  Twenty-four  million 
dollars'  worth  of  cotton,  rice,  and  tobacco  were 
exported  to  England  annually.  Four  million  dol- 
lars' worth  more  were  exported  to  other  countries. 
The  imports  from  England  were  seven  or  eight 
millions'  worth  of  woollens,  about  the  same  value 
of  cottons,  three  or  four  millions'  worth  of  iron, 
steel,  and  hardware,  and  miscellaneous  articles, 
bringing  the  total  up  to  twenty-eight  millions. 
From  this  it  was  plain  that  the  producers  of  bread- 
stuffs  in  the  United  States,  who  were  kept  out  of 
England  by  the  corn  laws,  were  forced  to  take 
their  products  to  the  West  Indies  and  South 
America,  and  exchange  them  there  for  four  mil- 
lions' worth  of  colonial  produce,  which  England 
would  receive,  in  order  to  balance  the  account. 
1  7  Adams,  Diary,  369.  2  3  Ann.  Beg.  37. 


242  ANDREW  JACKSON 

The  editor  of  the  "  Annual  Begister "  built  upon 
this  fact  his  argument  for  protection  as  a  retalia- 
tion to  break  down  the  English  corn  laws.  He 
saw  that  the  southern  staple  products  must  be  the 
fulcrum  for  the  lever  by  which  the  English  restric- 
tions were  to  be  broken.  He  offered  the  South- 
erners a  certain  consolation  in  the  hope  that  there 
would  be  a  larger  consumption  of  their  staples  at 
home,  but  really  concluded  that,  as  between  in- 
terests, the  grain  interest  of  the  North  and  West 
was  worth  more  than  the  interests  of  the  South. 
It  is  not  strange  if  this  mode  of  reasoning  was  not 
relished  in  the  South.1 

Mallary  stated  in  debate  that  the  consumption 
of  woollens  in  the  United  States  was  then  seventy- 
two  million  dollars  per  annum,  of  which  ten  mil- 
lions' worth  were  imported,  twenty-two  millions' 
worth  were  manufactured  in  the  United  States,  and 
forty  millions'  worth  were  produced  by  household 
spinning  and  weaving  ("  domestic  industry,"  as  the 
term  was  then  used).  If  these  statistics  are  worth 
anything,  the  twelve  millions  of  population  con- 
sumed, on  an  average,  six  dollars'  worth  of  woollens 
per  head  per  annum.  What  Mallary  proposed  to 
do  was  to  prevent  the  ten  millions'  worth  from 
being  imported.  To  do  this  he  would  increase  the 
cost  of  the  part  imported  and  the  part  manufac- 
tured at  home,  the  result  of  which  would  be  that 
still  a  larger  part  of  the  population  would  have  to 
be  clothed  in  homespun.  Thus  his  project  might 
1  See  page  248. 


FOREIGN  TRADE   BALANCE,   1828         243 

easily  defeat  itself,  so  far  as  it  aimed  to  benefit  the 
American  manufacturer,  and  it  would  deprive  the 
American  people  of  the  rest,  leisure,  and  greater 
satisfaction,  as  well  as  abundance,  which  new  ma- 
chinery and  the  factory  system  were  winning  out 
of  the  textile  industries,  as  compared  with  the  old 
household  spinning  and  weaving. 

The  Committee  on  Manufactures  of  the  House 
had  been  taking  testimony  on  the  tariff  during  the 
recess.  The  southern  free-traders  had  brought 
this  about  against  the  opposition  of  the  northern 
protectionists.  There  were  only  twentj^-eight  wit- 
nesses examined,  of  whom  nine  were  voluntary 
and  seven  were  members  of  Congress.  The  evi- 
dence amounted  to  nothing  but  complaints  of  hard 
times  and  losses.1  The  deduction  that  these  facts 
were  due  to  a  lack  of  sufficient  tariff  was  taken 
for  granted.2 

Silas  Wright  and  other  anti-tariff  men  on  the 
Committee  on  Manufactures  would  not  let  Mallary 
report  the  propositions  of  the  Harrisburg  conven- 
tion on  wool  and  woollens.3  Mallary  tried  to  intro- 
duce those  propositions  as  amendments  on  the  floor 
of  the  House.  All  the  interests,  industrial  and 

1  34  Niles,  1. 

2  As  a  specimen  of  the  value  of  such  complaints:   In  April, 
1828,  Niles  said  that  there  was  dullness  in  trade  and  great  distress 
at  Baltimore.     34  Niles,  139.     In  October  he  said  that  he  had 
not  been  through  parts  of  the  city  for  a  long  time,  and  that  on  a 
recent  walk  he  had  been  astonished  at  the  signs  of  prosperity. 
35  Niles,  81. 

8  Hammond's  Wright,  104. 


244  ANDREW  JACKSON 

political,  pounced  upon  the  bill  to  try  to  amend  it 
to  their  notions.  New  England  and  the  Adams 
men  wanted  high  duties  on  woollens  and  cottons, 
and  low  duties  on  wool,  iron,  hemp,  salt,  and  mo- 
lasses (the  raw  material  of  rum).  Pennsylvania, 
Ohio,  and  Kentucky  wanted  high  taxes  on  iron, 
wool,  hemp,  molasses  (protection  to  whiskey),  and 
low  taxes  on  woollens  and  cottons.  The  South- 
erners wanted  low  taxes  on  everything,  but  espe- 
cially on  finished  goods,  and  if  there  were  to  be 
heavy  taxes  on  these  latter  they  did  not  care  how 
heavy  the  taxes  on  the  raw  materials  were  made. 
This  last  point,  and  the  unswerving  loyalty  of 
rural  Pennsylvania  to  Jackson,  enabled  the  Jack- 
son party  to  hold  together  its  discordant  elements. 
The  political  and  economic  alliances  of  the  South 
were  plainly  inconsistent.1 

The  act,  which  resulted  from  the  scramble  of  sel- 
fish special  interests,  was  an  economic  monstrosity. 
The  industrial  interests  of  twelve  millions  of  people 
had  been  thrown  into  an  arena  where  there  was 
little  knowledge  of  economic  principles,  and  no 
information  about  the  industrial  state  of  the  coun- 
try, or  about  the  special  industries.  It  being  as- 
sumed that  the  Legislature  could,  would,  and  was 
about  to,  confer  favors  and  advantages,  there  was 
a  scramble  to  see  who  should  get  the  most.  At  the 
same  time  party  ambitions  and  strifes  seized  upon 
the  industrial  interests  as  capital  for  President- 
making.  May  19,  1828,  the  bill  became  a  law. 

1  See  page  250. 


TARIFF  OF  1828  245 

The  duty  on  wool  costing  less  than  10  cents  per 
pound  was  15  per  cent,  on  other  wool  20  per  cent 
and  30  per  cent.  That  on  woollens  was  40  per 
cent  for  a  year,  then  45  per  cent,  there  being  four 
minima,  50  cents,  11.00,  12.50,  $4.00.  All  which 
cost  over  $4.00  were  to  be  taxed  45  per  cent  for  a 
year,  then  50  per  cent.  Niles  and  all  the  woollen 
men  were  enraged  at  this  arrangement.  No  South 
Carolinian  was  more  discontented  than  they.  The 
"  dollar  minimum  "  was  the  especial  cause  of  their 
rage.  Cloth  which  cost  51  cents  they  wanted  to 
regard  as  costing  $2.50,  and  to  tax  it  40  per  cent 
on  that,  i.  e.,  $1.00.  The  dollar  minimum  let  in 
a  large  class  of  cloths  which  cost  from  $1.00  to 
$1.25,  and  which  could  be  run  down  to  cost  from 
90  to  99  cents, 

The  process  of  rolling  iron  had  not  yet  been  intro- 
duced into  this  country.  It  was  argued  that  rolled 
iron  was  not  as  good  as  forged,  and  this  was  made 
the  ground  for  raising  the  tax  on  rolled  iron  from 
$30.00  to  $37.00  per  ton,  while  the  tax  on  forged 
iron  was  raised  from  $18.00  to  $22.40.  Kolled 
iron  was  cheaper,  and  was  available  for  a  great 
number  of  uses.  The  tax,  in  this  case,  "  counter- 
vailed "  an  improvement  in  the  arts,  and  robbed 
the  American  people  of  their  share  in  the  advan- 
tage of  a  new  industrial  achievement.  The  tax  on 
steel  was  raised  from  $20.00  to  $30.00  per  ton  ;  that 
on  hemp  from  $35.00  to  $45.00  per  ton ;  that  on 
molasses  from  5  cents  to  10  cents  per  gallon ;  that 
01  ^ax  from  nothing  to  $35.00  per  ton.  The  taxes 


246  ANDREW  JACKSON 

on  sugar,  salt,  and  glass  remained  unchanged,  as 
did  that  on  tea  also,  save  by  a  differential  tonnage 
duty.  Coffee  was  classified  and  the  tax  reduced. 
The  tax  on  wine,  by  a  separate  act,  was  reduced 
one  half  or  more.1 

This  was  the  "  tariff  of  abominations,"  so  called 
on  account  of  the  number  of  especially  monstrous 
provisions  which  it  contained.  In  the  course  of 
the  debate  on  it,  the  dogma  was  freely  used  that 
protective  taxes  lower  prices,  and  the  exclusion  of 
American  grain  by  the  English  corn  laws  was  a 
constantly  effective  argument.  Credit  varying 
from  nine  to  eighteen  months  was  allowed  undei 
this  as  under  the  previous  tariffs. 

VIII.  Nullification.  The  Southerners  bitterly 
denounced  the  tariff  of  1828.  They  had  already 
begun  to  complain  of  the  operation  of  the  system 
four  or  five  years  before.  To  understand  their 
complaint,  it  is  enough  to  notice  with  what  reckless 
extravagance  the  tariff  theory,  even  if  its  truth 
were  admitted,  was  being  handled  in  1828.  Of 
course  the  public  argument  in  favor  of  the  tariff 
necessarily  took  the  form  of  assertions  that,  by 
some  occult  process  or  other,  the  taxation  proposed 
would  be  beneficent  to  all,  and  that  the  protective 
theory  was  a  theory  of  national  wealth.  The 
Southerners  were  sure  that  they  paid  the  expenses 
of  the  experiment,  and  they  ventured  the  inference 
that  those  who  were  so  eager  for  the  tariff  saw 
their  profit  in  it ;  but  when  the  attempt  was  made 

1  See  page  402. 


SOUTHERN  RESISTANCE  247 

to  find  any  compensation  to  the  nation  or  to  the 
South,  no  such  thing  could  be  found.  Up  to  that 
point  there  was  the  plain  fact  of  capital  expended 
and  capital  gained  ;  at  that  point  all  turned  into 
dogma  and  declamation. 

March  12,  1828,  McDuffie,  of  South  Carolina, 
presented  a  report  from  the  Committee  on  Ways 
and  Means1  against  the  tariff.  He  enumerated 
the  varieties  of  woollens  used  by  the  people,  and 
showed  the  operation  of  the  minima  upon  each. 
He  then  went  on  to  discuss  the  economic  doctrines 
and  the  theory  of  protection  as  a  mode  of  increas- 
ing the  wealth  of  the  country,  and  more  especially 
the  effect  of  the  proposed  taxes  on  the  agricultural 
and  exporting  sections.  The  facts  and  doctrines 
stated  by  him  were  unanswerable,  but  they  did  not 
touch  either  the  political  motives  or  the  interested 
pecuniary  motives  which  were  really  pushing  the 
tariff.  He  had  all  the  right  and  all  the  reason, 
but  not  the  power.  The  agricultural  States  were 
forced,  under  the  tariff,  either  to  export  their  pro- 
ducts, exchange  them  for  foreign  products,  and  pay 
taxes  on  these  latter  to  the  federal  treasury  before 
they  could  bring  them  home,  or  else  to  exchange 
their  products  with  the  northern  manufacturers 
for  manufacture^,  products,  and  to  pay  taxes  to  the 
latter  in  the  price  of  the  goods.  All  the  mysteries 
of  exchange,  banking,  and  brokerage  might  ob- 
scure, they  never  could  alter,  these  actual  economio 
relations  of  fact. 

i  34  NUes,  81. 


248  ANDREW  JACKSON 

The  protectionists  always  affected  to  deride  the 
southern  declaration  that  the  tax  fell  on  the  South. 
The  popular  notion  was  that  the  tariff  tax  bore  on 
the  foreigner  in  some  way  or  other,  and  helped  the 
domestic  producer  to  a  victory  over  the  foreigner. 
Since  the  object  of  the  tariff  was  to  prevent  im- 
portations of  foreign  goods,  it  would,  if  it  suc- 
ceeded, make  the  foreigner  stay  at  home,  and  keep 
his  goods  there.  This  of  course  deprived  him  of 
a  certain  demand  for  his  goods,  and  prevented  him 
from  reaching  a  gain  which,  under  other  condi- 
tions, he  might  have  won,  but  it  could  not  possibly 
render  him  or  his  capital  in  any  way  available 
for  "  encouraging  American  manufactures."  The 
American  consumer  of  American  products  is  the 
only  person  whom  American  laws  could  reach  in 
order  to  make  him  contribute  capital  to  build  up 
American  industry.  So  far,  then,  as  the  American 
protected  industries  were  concerned,  they  preyed 
upon  each  other  with  such  results  of  net  gain  and 
loss  as  chance  and  stupidity  might  bring  about. 
So  far  as  American  non-protected  industries  were 
concerned,  they,  being  the  naturally  strong  and 
independent  industries  of  the  country,  sustained 
the  whole  body  of  protected  industries,  which 
were  simply  parasites  upon  them.  The  protective 
theory,  as  a  theory  of  wealth,  therefore  proposed 
to  organize  national  industry  as  an  independent 
body  with  a  parasite  upon  it,  while  the  free-trade 
theory  proposed  to  let  industry  organize  itself  as 
so  many  independent  and  vigorous  bodies  as  the 


THE  SOUTHERN  GRIEVANCE  249 

labor,  capital,  and  land  of  the  country  could  sup- 
port. 

The  grievance  of  the  South  in  1828  is  undenia- 
ble. So  long  as  the  exports  of  the  country  were 
almost  exclusively  southern  products  —  cotton  and 
tobacco  —  and  so  long  as  the  federal  revenue  was 
almost  entirely  derived  from  duties  on  imports,  it 
is  certain  that  the  southern  industries  either  sup- 
ported the  federal  government  or  paid  tribute  to 
the  northern  manufacturers.  The  Southerners 
could  not  even  get  a  hearing  or  patient  and  proper 
study  of  the  economic  questions  at  issue.  Their  in- 
terests were  being  sacrificed  to  pretended  national 
interests,  just  as,  under  the  embargo,  the  interests 
of  New  England  were  sacrificed  to  national  inter- 
ests. In  each  case  the  party  which  considered  its 
interests  sacrificed  came  to  regard  the  Union  only 
as  a  cage,  in  which  all  were  held  in  order  that  the 
stronger  combination  might  plunder  the  weaker. 
In  each  case  the  party  which  was  in  power,  and 
was  having  its  way,  refused  to  heed  any  remon- 
strance ;  in  fact  regarded  remonstrance  as  rebellion. 

The  more  thoroughly  the  economist  and  the 
political  philosopher  recognizes  the  grievance  of  the 
Southerners  in  1828,  the  more  he  must  regret  the 
unwisdom  of  the  southern  proceedings.  The  oppo- 
nents of  the  tariff  of  1828  adopted  the  policy  of 
voting  in  favor  of  all  the  "  abominations  "  on  points 
of  detail,  in  the  hope  that  they  could  so  weight 
down  the  bill  that  it  would  at  last  fail  as  a  whole.1 

35Niles,  52. 


250  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Hence  those  Southerners  who  supported  Jackson 
voted  with  the  Pennsylvania  and  New  York  high- 
tariff  men  for  all  the  worst  features  of  the  bill, 
while  New  England  and  the  Adams  men,  who 
started  as  high-tariff  men,  voted  on  the  other  side. 
The  southern  Jackson  men  wanted  to  give  way 
sufficiently  on  the  tariff  to  secure  one  or  two 
doubtful  States.  For  instance,  they  were  willing 
to  protect  whiskey  and  hemp  to  win  Kentucky 
from  Clay  to  Jackson.  They  were,  in  fact,  play- 
ing a  game  which  was  far  too  delicate,  between 
their  economic  interests  and  their  political  party 
affiliations.  They  were  caught  at  last.  In  the 
vote  on  the  previous  question  in  the  House,  the 
yeas  were  110,  of  whom  11  were  Adams  men  and 
99  Jackson  men ;  the  nays  were  91,  of  whom  80 
were  Adams  men  and  11  Jackson  men.  The  nays 
were  those  who  wanted  a  tariff,  but  who  wanted  to 
amend  the  bill  before  them  a  great  deal  more  be- 
fore they  passed  it ;  that  is,  they  wanted  to  take 
out  the  abominations  which  the  anti-tariff  men  had 
voted  into  it.  On  the  final  passage  of  the  bill,  the 
yeas  were  105,  of  whom  61  were  Adams  men  and 
44  Jackson  men  ;  the  nays  were  94,  of  whom  35 
were  Adams  men  and  59  were  Jackson  men.  Of 
the  yeas  only  3  were  from  south  of  the  Potomac. 
The  policy  of  the  southern  free-traders,  like  most 
attempts  at  legislative  finesse,  proved  an  entire 
failure.  The  high-tariff  men,  although  every  man 
had  intense  objection  to  something  in  the  bill, 
voted  for  it  rather  than  defeat  the  bill  entirely. 


THE  RESOLUTIONS  OF  1798  251 

The  New  England  men  did  not  know  how  to  vote. 
In  the  end  23  of  them  voted  against  the  bill  and 
16  for  it.1  The  bill  passed  the  Senate,  26  to  21. 
Webster  did  not  know  on  May  7th  how  he  should 
vote.2  He  voted  for  it,  and  then  went  home  and 
defended  the  vote  on  the  ground  that  he  had  to 
take  the  good  and  evil  of  the  measure  together.2 
After  all,  the  tariff  made  no  capital  for  anybody. 
The  protectionists,  by  threatening  both  parties, 
forced  both  to  concede  the  tariff,  after  which  the 
protectionists  voted  with  either  party,  according  to 
their  preferences,  just  as  they  would  have  done  if 
both  had  resisted  instead  of  both  yielding. 

Van  Buren  obtained  "  instructions  "  from  Albany 
to  vote  for  the  tariff,  in  order  to  be  able  to  do  so 
without  offending  the  Southerners.4  Calhoun  de- 
clared, in  a  speech  in  the  Senate,  February  23, 
1837,  that  Van  Buren  was  to  blame  for  the  tariff 
of  1828.5 

The  South  had  already  begun  to  discuss  reme- 
dies before  the  tariff  of  1828  was  passed.  Colonel 
Hamilton,  of  South  Carolina,  at  a  public  dinner  in 
the  autumn  of  1827,  proposed  "  nullification  "  as  a 
remedy,  the  term  being  borrowed  from  the  Vir- 
ginia and  Kentucky  resolutions  of  1798.  Those 

1  35  Niles,  52.       2  7  Adams,  534.      8  1  Webster's  Works,  165. 

4  Mackeinzie,  103 ;  Hammond's  Wright,  105. 

6  Green's  Telegraph  Extra,  271,  says  that  Adams  wanted  to 
yeto  the  tariff  of  1828,  and  throw  himself  on  the  South,  uniting 
with  Calhoun,  but  that  Clay  would  not  let  him  do  so,  because  that 
would  ruin  him  and  the  American  system.  This  is  a  very  doubt* 
f ul  story. 


252  ANDREW  JACKSON 

resolutions  now  came  to  have,  for  a  certain  party 
in  the  South,  the  character  and  authority  of  an  ad- 
dendum to  the  Constitution.  They  were,  in  truth, 
only  the  manifesto  of  a  rancorous  opposition,  like 
the  resolutions  of  the  Hartford  convention.  Yet, 
at  that  time,  to  call  a  man  a  "  federalist "  would 
have  been  a  graver  insult  throughout  the  South 
than  it  would  be  now,  in  the  North,  to  call  a  man 
a  secessionist. 

An  examination  of  the  resolutions  of  1798,  as 
they  were  adopted,  will  fail  to  find  nullification  in 
them.  The  resolutions,  with  a  number  of  other 
most  interesting  documents  connected  therewith, 
are  given  by  Niles  in  a  supplement  to  his  43d  vol- 
ume. By  examination  of  these  it  appears  that 
Jefferson's  original  draft  of  the  Kentucky  resolu- 
tions contained,  in  the  eighth  resolution,  these 
words  :  "  Where  powers  are  assumed  which  have 
not  been  delegated,  a  nullification  of  the  act  is 
the  right  remedy."  The  Legislature  of  Ken- 
tucky cut  out  this  and  nearly  all  the  rest  of  the 
eighth  resolution.  The  executory  resolution,  as 
drawn  by  Jefferson,  ended  thus  :  "  The  co-States 
[he  means  those  States  which  by  adopting  these 
resolutions  agree  to  cooperate]  ...  will  concur  in 
declaring  these  acts  [the  alien  and  sedition  laws] 
void  and  of  no  force,  and  will  each  take  measures 
of  its  own  for  providing  that  neither  of  these  acts 
.  .  .  shall  be  exercised  within  their  respective  ter- 
ritories." Here,  instead  of  an  undefined  term,  we 
have  a  specific  programme,  which  shows,  without 


THE  RESOLUTIONS  OF  1798  253 

ambiguity,  what  the  term  meant.  Different  States, 
while  remaining  in  the  Union,  were  to  prohibit 
validity  within  their  territories,  each  to  such  fed- 
eral acts  as  it  disapproved,  speaking  through  its 
constituted  authorities.  The  Legislature  struck 
this  out,  and  adopted,  as  the  executory  resolution : 
"  The  co-States  .  .  .  will  concur  in  declaring  these 
[acts]  void  and  of  no  force,  and  will  each  unite 
with  this  commonwealth  in  requesting  their  repeal 
at  the  next  session  of  Congress."  Some  of  the 
other  States  responded  to  these  resolutions,  and  in 
1799  Kentucky  passed  a  resolution  in  which  oc- 
curs this  statement :  "  A  nullification  by  those  sov- 
ereignties of  all  unauthorized  acts  done  under  color 
of  that  instrument  [the  Constitution]  is  the  rightful 
remedy."  Madison's  Virginia  resolutions  do  not 
contain  nullification  either  in  form  or  substance, 
least  of  all  as  a  practical  remedy.  They  declared 
the  alien  and  sedition  acts  unconstitutional,  and 
that  "  the  necessary  and  proper  measures  will  be 
taken  by  each  [of  the  concurring  States]  for  co- 
operating with  this  State  "  to  preserve  the  reserved 
rights  of  the  States  and  people.  In  1799  Madison 
made  a  long  report  to  the  Virginia  House  of  Del- 
egates, in  which  he  analyzed  and  defended  the 
resolutions  of  1798,  and  especially  defended  the 
remedy  proposed,  namely,  a  solemn  resolution  and 
protest,  communicated  to  the  other  States.  He 
construed  this  remedy  strictly.  In  May,  1830, 
Madison  wrote  to  Livingston,  approving  of  an 
anti-nullification  speech  made  by  him  on  March 


254  ANDREW  JACKSON 

15th  of  that  year.  He  thus  states  the  error  of  the 
nullifiers :  "  The  error  in  the  late  comments  on  the 
Virginia  proceedings  has  arisen  from  a  failure  to 
distinguish  between  what  is  declaratory  of  opinion 
and  what  is  ipso  facto  executory ;  between  the 
rights  of  the  parties  and  of  a  single  party ;  and 
between  resorts  within  the  purview  of  the  Consti- 
tution and  the  ultima  ratio  which  appeals  from 
a  Constitution,  cancelled  by  its  abuses,  to  original 
rights,  paramount  to  all  Constitutions."  In  1830 
Madison  also  wrote  two  long  letters,  one  to  Edward 
Everett,  the  other  to  Andrew  Stevenson,  in  which  he 
interpreted  the  Virginia  resolutions.  He  certainly 
softens  them  down  somewhat,  which  is  a  proof  that 
party  heat  influenced  him  when  he  wrote  them. 
He  lays  especial  stress  on  the  limited  and  harmless 
nature  of  the  proposed  action  of  Virginia.  His 
two  letters  are  the  best  statement  of  "  Madisonian 
federalism." 

It  is  certain  that  the  nullification  of  a  federal 
law  in  a  State,  by  a  State  authority,  as  a  practical 
and  available  remedy  against  an  offensive  measure, 
found  no  sanction  in  1798-99,  except  in  the  sup- 
plementary resolution  of  Kentucky,  when  the  heat 
of  the  controversy  favored  an  extreme  position. 
It  was  a  notion  of  Jefferson,  in  which  Madison  did 
not  join,  and  which  neither  Legislature  adopted, 
except  as  stated.  Never  until  1827  was  any  body 
of  men  found  to  take  up  the  notion,  and  try 
to  handle  it  as  reasonable  and  practical.  Nulli- 
fication is  jacobinism.  It  is  revolution  made  a 


JEFFERSON  AND  NULLIFICATION        255 

constant  political  means,  and  brought  into  the 
every-day  business  of  civil  life.  Nothing  is  more 
astonishing  in  American  political  history  than 
the  immunity  enjoyed  by  some  men,  and  the  un- 
fair responsibility  enforced  against  others.  Every 
school-boy  is  taught  to  execrate  the  alien  and  sedi- 
tion laws,  and  John  Adams  bears  the  odium  of 
them,  but  no  responsibility  worth  speaking  of  for 
nullification  attaches  to  Jefferson.  He  was  the 
father  of  it,  and  the  sponsor  of  it,  and  the  authority 
of  his  name  was  what  recommended  it  in  1827. 

In  December,  1827,  the  South  Carolina  Legisla- 
ture raised  a  committee  on  the  powers  of  the  federal 
government  in  regard  to  tariff.  In  the  winter 
of  1827-28  the  Legislatures  of  several  southern 
States  passed  resolutions  about  protective  tariff 
legislation.  South  Carolina  had  been  a  federal 
State  in  the  previous  generation.  She  had  not 
been  opposed  to  the  federal  government  save  in 
the  matter  of  her  "  police  bill."  Georgia  had  been 
the  turbulent  State,  —  the  one  which  had  had  the 
most  frequent  collisions  with  the  federal  govern- 
ment, and  had  behaved  on  those  occasions  with 
violence  and  folly.  South  Carolina  in  Monroe's 
time  was  latitudinarian  and  anti-radical,  and  as 
such  was  opposed  to  Georgia.  South  Carolina 
now  declared  the  tariff,  internal  improvements, 
and  appropriations  for  the  colonization  society  un- 
constitutional.1 Georgia  declared  the  tariff  and 
internal  improvements  unconstitutional;  declared 
i  38  Niles,  154. 


256  ANDREW  JACKSON 

that  Georgia  would  not  submit  to  the  action  of 
Congress,  and  affirmed  the  right  of  secession.1 
The  old  Crawford  party,  however,  took  sides 
against  nullification,  and  prevented  Georgia  from 
ranging  herself  with  South  Carolina.  At  a  meet- 
ing at  Athens,  August  6,  1828,  presided  over  by 
Crawford,  a  committee,  consisting  of  Wayne,  Ber- 
rien,  Cobb,  Gilmer,  Clayton,  Troup,  and  others, 
reported  an  address  and  resolutions  denouncing 
the  tariff,  but  disclaiming  all  disunion  sentiments 
or  purposes,  and  favoring  2  constitutional  remedies. 
In  1832  Crawford  advocated  a  theory  that  secession 
was  wrong  until  after  a  convention  to  amend  the 
Constitution  had  been  tried  and  proved  a  failure.3 
North  Carolina  protested,  in  1828,  against  the 
new  tariff,  declaring  that  it  violated  the  spirit  of 
the  Constitution  and  opposed  the  interests  of  that 
State.  Alabama  denied  the  constitutionality  of 
the  tariff,  and  denounced  it  as  pillage  of  that 
State. 

The  proceedings  of  South  Carolina  did  not 
remedy  the  matter  at  all ;  but  they  altered  the 
issue  very  much  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  protec- 
tionists. The  Union  and  the  supremacy  of  the  law 
were  something  on  which  a  much  better  fight  could 
be  made  than  on  the  tariff,  and  the  protectionists, 
having  secured  the  law,  wanted  nothing  better 
than  to  draw  away  attention  from  the  criticism  of 
it  by  making  the  fight  on  nullification.  Calhoun 
and  the  South  Carolinians  had  changed  the  fighting 

1  3  Ann.  Beg.  64  a  35  NUes,  14.  «  42  Niles,  389. 


REASONS  FOR  EXASPERATION  257 

from  free-trade  to  nullification,  and  on  that  they 
stood  alone.  They  threw  away  a  splendid  chance 
to  secure  a  sound  policy  on  one  of  the  first  economic 
interests  of  the  country.  In  the  debate  between 
Webster  and  Hayne  the  latter  won  a  complete 
victory  on  tariff  and  land.  Webster  made  the, 
fighting  on  the  constitutional  question,  and  turned 
away  from  the  other  questions  almost  entirely. 
He  had  no  standing  ground  on  tariff  and  land. 
He  was  on  record  in  his  earliest  speeches  as  an 
intelligent  free-trader,  and  his  biographer1  has 
infinite  and  fruitless  trouble  to  try  to  explain  away 
the  fact.  When  Hayne  opened  the  constitutional 
question,  he  gave  Webster  every  chance  of  victory. 
The  action  of  Congress  in  passing  the  tariff  of 
1828,  in  spite  of  the  attitude  of  the  South,  seemed 
to  the  Southerners  to  indicate  an  insolent  disregard 
of  their  expostulations.  In  the  winter  of  1828-29 
the  South  Carolina  Legislature  sent  to  the  Senate 
an  "  Exposition  and  Protest "  against  the  new  law. 
Georgia  wanted  to  nullify  both  Indian  legislation 
and  tariff.  Virginia  adopted  the  principle  of  nulli- 
fication. North  Carolina  denounced  the  tariff,  but 
nullification  also.  Alabama  denounced  the  tariff', 
but  recognized  the  right  of  Congress  to  levy  re- 
venue duties,  with  incidental  protective  effect.  In 
1829  Alabama  went  nearer  to  nullification.  This 
was  the  high  water  mark  of  nullification  outside  of 
South  Carolina.  All  these  States  were  taunted, 
in  answer  to  their  remonstrances,  with  the  votes  of 
1  1  Curtis's  Webster,  207  et  seq. 


258  ANDREW  JACKSON 

the  Southern  members  on  the  details  of  the  tariff 
of  abominations. 

Neither  party  could  let  the  tariff  rest.  A  high 
tariff  is  in  a  state  of  unstable  equilibrium.  If 
legislators  could  ever  gain  full  and  accurate  know- 
ledge of  all  the  circumstances  and  relations  of 
trade  in  their  own  country,  and  in  all  countries 
with  which  it  trades ;  if  they  had  sufficient  wit  to 
establish  an  artificial  tax  system  which  should  just 
fit  the  complicated  facts,  and  produce  the  results 
they  want  without  doing  any  harm  to  anybody's 
interests;  and  if,  furthermore,  the  circumstances 
and  relations  of  trade  would  remain  unchanged,  it 
would  be  possible  to  make  a  permanent  and  stable 
tariff.  Each  of  these  conditions  is  as  monstrously 
impossible  as  anything  in  economics  can  be.  Hence 
constant  new  efforts  are  necessary,  as  well  to  suit 
those  to  whom  the  tariff  does  not  yet  bring  what 
they  expected  from  it,  as  to  silence  those  who  are 
oppressed  by  it.  The  persons  whose  interests 
were  violated  by  the  tariff  of  1828  tried  every 
means  in  their  power  to  evade  it.  January  27, 
1830,  Mallary  brought  in  a  bill  to  render  the  cus- 
tom house  appraisal  more  stringent  and  effective. 
McDuffie  responded  with  a  proposition  to  reduce 
all  taxes  on  woollens,  cottons,  iron,  hemp,  flax, 
molasses,  and  indigo  to  what  they  were  before  the 
tariff  of  1824  was  passed.  The  whole  subject  was 
reopened.  McDuffie's  bill  was  defeated,  and  Mal- 
lary's  was  passed.  By  separate  bills  the  taxes  on 
salt,  molasses,  coffee,  cocoa,  and  tea  were  reduced. 


EFFECT  OF  JACKSON'S  TOAST  259 

In  April,  1830,  came  Jackson's  Union  toast.1 
It  was  a  great  disappointment  to  the  mass  of  the 
Southerners,  who  had  been  his  ardent  supporters, 
and  who  had  hoped,  from  his  action  in  regard  to 
Georgia  and  the  Indians,  that  he  would  let  the 
powers  of  the  federal  government  go  by  default  in 
the  case  of  the  tariff  also.2  The  personal  element, 
which  always  had  such  strong  influence  with  Jack- 
son, had  become  more  or  less  involved  in  the  nulli- 
fication struggle  with  which  Calhoun  was  identi- 
fied. 

"  I  was  aware  of  the  hostility  of  the  influential  charac- 
ter aluded  to  [Calhoun]  —  I  sincerely  regret  the  course 
taken  by  Hamilton  &  Hayne  —  The  people  of  South 
Carolina  will  not,  nay  cannot  sustain  such  nulifying  Doc- 
trines. They  Carolinians  are  a  patriotic  &  highminded 
people,  and  they  prize  their  liberty  too  high  to  jeopard- 
ize it,  at  the  shrine  of  an  ambitious  Demagogue,  whether 
a  native  of  Carolina  or  of  any  other  country  —  This 
influential  character  in  this  heat,  has  led  Hamilton  & 
Hayne  astray,  and  it  will,  I  fear,  lead  to  the  injury  of 
Hamilton  &  loose  him  his  election  —  But  the  ambitious 
Demagogue  aluded  to,  would  sacrifice  friends  &  country, 
&  move  heaven  &  earth,  if  he  had  the  power,  to  gratify 
his  unholy  ambition  —  His  course  will  prostrate  him 
here  as  well  as  every  where  else —  Our  friend  Mr 
Grundy  says  he  will  abandon  him  unless  he  can  satisfy 
him  that  he  has  used  his  influence  to  put  down  this 
nulifying  doctrine,  which  threatens  to  desolve  our  happy 
union."  8 

1  See  page  203.  2  Hodgson,  166-7. 

3  Jackson  to  Lewis,  Aug.  25,  1830,  from  Franklin,  Tenn.    Ford 

MSS. 


260  ANDREW   JACKSON 

The  Georgia  case  involved  only  indirectly  the 
authority  and  prestige  of  the  federal  government. 
The  immediate  parties  in  interest  were  the  In- 
dians. Nullification  involved  directly  the  power 
and  prestige  of  the  federal  government,  and  he 
would  certainly  be  a  most  exceptional  person  who, 
being  President  of  the  United  States,  would  allow 
the  government  of  which  he  was  the  head  to  be 
defied  and  insulted. 

On  the  22d  of  November,  1830,  a  bill  for  a 
State  convention  failed  to  get  a  two  thirds  vote 
in  the  South  Carolina  Legislature.  An  attempt 
was  then  made  to  test  the  constitutionality  of  the 
tariff  in  the  courts  by  refusing  to  pay  duty  bonds, 
and  pleading  "  no  consideration "  for  the  taxes 
levied;  but  the  United  States  District  Court,  in 
1831,  refused  to  hear  evidence  of  "  no  considera- 
tion," drawn  from  the  character  of  the  tariff  of 
1828.1 

June  14,  1831,  Jackson  wrote  a  letter  to  a  com- 
mittee of  citizens  of  Charleston,  in  answer  to  an 
invitation  to  attend  the  celebration  of  the  Fourth 
of  July  at  that  city,  in  which  he  indicated  that 
a  policy  of  force  would  be  necessary  and  proper 
against  nullification.  The  Governor  of  the  State 
brought  this  letter  to  the  notice  of  the  Legislature, 
which  adopted  resolutions  denouncing  the  act  of 
the  President  in  writing  such  a  letter,  and  denying 
the  lawfulness  of  the  steps  which  he  described. 
There  were  some  in  South  Carolina  who,  at  this 

1  7  Ann.  Reg.  260. 


EFFECT  OF  JACKSON'S  TOAST  261 

time,  favored  secession,  so  soon  as  South  Carolina 
could  organize  a  sufficient  combination  to  go  out 
with  her.  Cheves  was  a  leader  of  such.1 

North  Carolina  now  denounced  nullification,  but 
the  other  States  as  yet  held  back. 

On  the  5th  of  October,  1831,  a  free-trade  con- 
vention met  at  Philadelphia.  On  the  26th  of 
October  a  protectionist  convention  met  at  New 
York.  Gallatin  wrote  the  address  published  by 
the  former.  Of  course  it  was  all  free  trade,  —  no 
nullification.  A.  H.  Everett  wrote  the  address 
issued  by  the  New  York  convention.  The  public 
debt  was  being  paid  off  with  great  rapidity,  and 
the  need  for  revenue  was  all  the  time  declining. 
The  free-traders  said :  In  that  case,  let  us  abolish 
the  taxes,  and  not  raise  a  revenue  which  we  do  not 
need.  It  will  be  an  additional  advantage  that  we 
can  do  away,  without  any  complicated  devices, 
with  all  the  protective  taxes  which  one  citizen  pays 
to  another,  and  which  take  shelter  under  the  reve- 
nue taxes.  Let  the  people  keep  and  use  their  own 
earnings.  The  protectionists  wanted  to  remove 
the  taxes  from  all  commodities  the  like  of  which 
were  not  produced  here.  They  argued  that,  if  the 
country  was  out  of  debt,  it  could  afford  to  enter  on 
great  schemes  of  national  development  by  govern- 
ment expenditure.  They  therefore  proposed  to 
keep  up  the  taxes  for  protective  purposes,  and  to 
spend  the  surplus  revenue  (in  which  they  regarded 
the  revenue  from  land  as  a  thing  by  itself)  on  in- 

1  8  Adams,  Diary,  410. 


262  ANDREW  JACKSON 

ternal  improvements,  pensions,  French  spoliation 
claims,  etc.  These  were  not  yet  strictly  party  posi- 
tions, but  in  general  the  former  was  the  adminis- 
tration policy  and  the  latter  the  opposition  policy. 

The  session  of  1831-32  was  full  of  tariff.  A 
presidential  election  was  again  at  hand.  J.  Q. 
Adams  was  put  at  the  head  of  the  Committee  on 
Manufactures  with  an  anti-tariff  majority.  Mc- 
Duffie  was  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Ways 
and  Means.  January  19,  1832,  the  House  in- 
structed the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  collect 
information  about  manufactures.  A  report  was 
rendered  in  two  large  volumes,  in  1833,  after  the 
whole  subject  had  been  disposed  of.  Clay  was 
nominated  for  President  in  December,  1831,  and 
was  preparing  his  policy  and  programme.  A  con- 
ference was  held  at  Washington  by  his  supporters, 
at  which  he  presented  his  views,  as  it  appears,  in  a 
somewhat  dictatorial  manner.1  He  wanted  all  the 
revenue  taxes  (on  tea,  coffee,  wine,  etc.)  abolished. 
The  protective  taxes  he  wanted  to  make  prohibi- 
tory, so  as  to  stop  revenue.  He  said  that  the  du- 
ties on  hemp  were  useless,  as  our  dew-rotted  hemp 
never  could  compete  with  the  water-rotted  hemp 
which  was  imported.  This  was  rather  hard,  con- 
sidering that  the  tax  on  hemp  had  been  laid  for 
the  sake  of  Kentucky,  and  now  the  member  from 
Kentucky  and  father  of  the  "American  system" 
said  that  protection  to  hemp  was  useless.  Clay 
was  willing  to  allow  a  drawback  on  rigging  ex- 
1  8  Adams,  Diary,  445. 


TARIFF  OF  1832  263 

ported.  Dearborn  said  that  the  tax  on  hemp  had 
closed  every  rope-walk  in  Boston.  Adams  said 
that  the  House  Committee  on  Manufactures  would 
reduce  the  duties  prospectively ;  that  is,  to  take 
effect  when  the  debt  should  be  paid.  Clay  wanted 
to  stop  paying  the  debt  in  order  to  take  away  the 
administration  "  cry."  Adams  took  sides  with 
Jackson  on  the  point  of  paying  the  debt.  He 
thought  public  opinion  favored  that  policy.  He 
also  thought  Clay's  programme  would  appear  like 
defying  the  South.  Clay  said  that  he  did  not  care 
whom  he  defied.  "  To  preserve,  maintain,  and 
strengthen  the  American  system  he  would  defy 
the  South,  the  President,  and  the  Devil."  We 
may  say  what  we  like  of  the  nullifiers,  but,  so  far 
as  they  met  with  and  knew  of  this  disposition  on 
the  part  of  Clay  and  his  supporters,  they  would 
not  have  been  free  men  if  they  had  not  resisted  it  3 
for  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  real  question 
at  issue  was  whether  their  property  should  be 
taken  away  from  them  or  not. 

In  the  annual  message  for  1831  Jackson  recom- 
mended that  the  tariff  be  amended  so  as  to  reduce 
revenue.  February  8,  1832,  McDufne  reported 
a  bill  making  the  taxes  on  iron,  steel,  sugar,  salt, 
hemp,  flour,  woollens,  cottons,  and  manufactures 
of  iron  twenty-five  per  cent  for  a  year  after  June 
30,  1832,  then  eighteen  and  three  fourths  per  cent 
for  a  year,  and  then  twelve  and  one  half  per  cent 
for  an  indefinite  period.  All  other  goods  which 
were  taxed  over  twelve  and  one  half  per  cent  at 


264  ANDREW  JACKSON 

the  time  of  passing  the  bill  were  to  be  taxed 
twelve  and  one  half  per  cent  after  June  30,  1832. 
April  27,  1832,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
(McLane)  presented  a  tariff  bill  in  answer  to  a  call 
by  the  House.  It  was  planned  to  raise  twelve  mil- 
lions of  revenue.  It  was  proposed  to  collect  fifteen 
per  cent  on  imports  in  general,  with  especial  and 
higher  rates  on  the  great  protected  commodities. 
This  was  the  administration  plan.  The  House 
Committee  on  Manufactures  reported  a  bill  May 
23,  which  was  taken  up  instead  of  the  others. 
The  battle  reopened,  and  ranged  over  the  whole 
field  oi  politics  and  political  economy.  The  act,  as 
finally  passed  (July  14, 1832),  reduced  or  abolished 
many  of  the  revenue  taxes.  It  did  not  materially 
alter  the  protective  taxes.  The  tax  on  iron  was 
reduced,  that  on  cottons  was  unchanged,  that  on 
woollens  was  raised  to  fifty  per  cent ;  wool  costing 
less  than  eight  cents  per  pound  was  made  free, 
other  wool  was  taxed  as  before.  Woollen  yarn 
was  now  first  taxed.  This  was  the  position  of 
tariff  and  nullification  when  the  presidential  elec- 
tion was  held. 

IX.  National  Bank.  —  In  the  United  States  the 
democratic  element  in  public  opinion  has  always 
been  jealous  of  and  hostile  to  the  money  power. 
The  hostility  has  broken  out  at  different  times  in 
different  ways,  as  an  assault  on  banks,  corpora- 
tions, vested  rights,  and  public  credit.  Sometimes 
it  seems  as  if  the  "  money  power  "  were  regarded 
superstitiously,  as  if  it  were  a  superhuman  entity, 


BANK  OF  NORTH  AMERICA  265 

with  will  and  power.  The  assaults  on  it  are  min- 
gled with  dread,  as  of  an  enemy  with  whom  one 
is  not  yet  ready  to  cope,  but  whose  power  is  in- 
creasing rapidly,  so  that  the  chance  of  ultimate 
victory  over  him  is  small.  This  antagonism  is  but 
a  premonition  of  the  conflict  between  democracy 
and  plutocracy,  which  is  the  next  great  crisis  which 
the  human  race  has  to  meet.  We  are  now  to  study 
one  of  the  greatest  struggles  between  democracy 
and  the  money  power. 

After  a  renewal  of  the  charter  of  the  first  Bank 
of  the  United  States  had  been  refused,  in  1812, 
a  great  number  of  local  banks  were  organized, 
especially  in  the  Middle  States.  This  movement 
unfortunately  coincided  with  the  second  war  with 
England.  The  combination  of  bank  mania  and  war 
financiering  produced  -a  very  extravagant  bank- 
note inflation.  The  party  in  power  was  forced 
to  imitate  measure  after  measure  of  Hamilton's 
financial  system,  which  they  had  so  vigorously  de- 
nounced twenty  years  before.  At  last  they  came 
to  a  national  bank  also.  The  Senate  wanted  to 
make  a  Bank  to  suit  the  administration,  that  is, 
one  which  could  make  loans  to  the  Treasury ;  one, 
therefore,  which  was  not  bound  to  pay  specie.  The 
House  strenuously  resisted  the  creation  of  such  a 
mere  paper-money  machine.  Madison  vetoed,  in 
January,  1815,  a  bill  which  had  been  passed  in 
conformity  with  the  ideas  of  the  House.  Another 
bill  was  introduced  at  once,  which  provided  for  a 
bank  to  conform  to  the  wishes  of  the  administra* 


266  ANDREW  JACKSON 

tion.  This  bill  was  before  the  House  on  the  day 
on  which  news  of  the  treaty  of  Ghent  was  received 
at  Washington  (February  13).  Pitkin  says  that 
the  news  was  received  at  the  moment  of  voting.1 
The  bill  was  laid  aside  and  was  never  revived. 

At  the  next  session  (1815-16)  the  proposition 
came  up  for  a  national  bank,  not  as  a  financial 
resource  for  the  Treasury,  but  to  check  the  local 
banks  and  force  a  return  to  specie  payments.  The 
charter  became  a  law  April  10,  1816.  It  was  a 
close  imitation  of  Hamilton's  Bank.  In  this  Bank 
also  the  government  had  a  big  stock  note  for  seven 
millions  of  dollars  of  stock,  which  it  had  sub- 
scribed for  as  a  resource  to  pay  its  debts,  not  as 
investment  for  free  capital.  The  Bank  was  char- 
tered for  twenty  years.  Its  capital  was  thirty-five 
millions,  seven  subscribed  by  the  United  States  in 
a  five  per  cent  stock  note,  seven  by  the  public  in 
specie,  and  twenty-one  by  the  public  in  United 
States  stocks.  It  was  to  pay  a  bonus  of  one  and 
one  half  millions  in  two,  three,  and  four  years.  It 
was  not  to  issue  notes  under  $5.00,  and  not  to  sus- 
pend specie  payments  under  a  penalty  of  twelve 
per  cent  on  all  notes  not  redeemed  on  presenta- 
tion. Twenty  directors  were  to  be  elected  annually 
by  the  stockholders,  and  five,  being  stockholders, 
were  to  be  appointed  by  the  President  of  the 
United  States  and  confirmed  by  the  Senate.  The 
federal  government  was  to  charter  no  other  bank 
during  the  period  of  the  charter  of  this.  The 

i  Pitkin,  427. 


CHARTER  OF  THE  SECOND  BANK        267 

Secretary  of  the  Treasury  might  at  any  time  re- 
deem the  stocks  in  the  capital  of  the  Bank,  in- 
cluding the  five  per  cent  subscription  stock.  He 
might  remove  the  public  deposits  if  he  should  see 
fit,  but  must  state  his  reasons  for  so  doing  to  Con- 
gress at  its  next  meeting.  The  Bank  engaged  to 
transfer  public  funds  without  charge.  At  first  it 
undertook  to  equalize  the  currency  by  receiving 
any  notes  of  any  branch  at  any  branch,  but  it 
was  soon  forced  to  abandon  the  attempt.  The  old 
Bank  had  never  done  this.1  Two  things  were 
mixed  up  in  this  attempt :  (1)  The  equalization  of 
the  different  degrees  of  depreciation  existing  in  the 
bank-notes  of  different  districts.  This  the  Bank 
could  not  have  corrected  save  by  relentlessly  pre- 
senting all  local  notes  for  redemption,  until  they 
were  made  equal  to  specie  or  were  withdrawn.  So 
far  as  the  Bank  did  this,  it  won  the  reputation  of 
a  "  monster "  which  was  crushing  out  the  local 
banks.1  (2)  The  equalization  of  the  domestic  ex- 
changes. This  was  impossible  and  undesirable, 
since  capital  never  could  be  distributed  in  exact 
proportion  to  local  needs  for  it.  The  failure  of 
the  Bank  to  "  equalize  the  exchanges,"  and  its  re^ 
fusal  to  take  any  notes  at  any  branch,  earned  it 
more  popular  condemnation  than  anything  else. 

The  Bank  charter  contained  a  great  many  faults. 

To  mention  only  those  which  affected  its  career: 

The  capital  was  too  large.     There  was  no  reason 

for  lending  its  capital   to  the  government,   i.  e., 

1  Carey's  Letters,  55.  *  See  page  156. 


268  ANDREW  JACKSON 

putting  it  into. public  stocks,  or  making  the  Bank 
a  syndicate  of  bond-holders.  There  was  every  rea- 
son why  the  United  States  should  not  hold  stock 
in  it,  especially  when  it  could  not  pay  for  the  same. 
The  dividends  of  the  bank  from  1816  to  1831, 
when  the  government  paid  its  stock  note,  averaged 
five  per  cent  per  annum,  paid  semi-annually.  The 
United  States  paid  five  per  cent  on  its  stock  note 
quarterly.  This  gave  room  for  another  complaint 
by  the  enemies  of  the  Bank. 

The  Bank  was  established  at  Philadelphia.  It 
began  with  nineteen  branches,  and  grew  to  twenty- 
five.  Specie  payments  were  resumed  nominally 
February  20,  1817,  after  which  date,  according  to 
a  joint  resolution  of  Congress  of  April  16,  1816, 
the  Treasury  ought  to  receive  only  specie,  or  notes 
of  the  Bank  of  the  United  States,  or  of  specie- 
paying  banks,  or  Treasury  notes.  In  the  first  two 
years  of  its  existence  the  great  Bank  was  carried 
to  the  verge  of  bankruptcy  by  as  bad  banking  as 
ever  was  heard  of.  Instead  of  checking  the  other 
banks  in  their  improper  proceedings,  it  led  and 
surpassed  them  all.  A  clique  inside  the  Bank  was 
jobbing  in  its  shares,  and  robbing  it  to  provide  the 
margins.  Instead  of  rectifying  the  currency,  it 
made  the  currency  worse.  Instead  of  helping  the 
country  out  of  the  distress  produced  by  the  war,  it 
plunged  the  country  into  the  commercial  crisis  of 
1819,  which  caused  a  general  liquidation,  lasting 
four  or  five  years.  All  the  old-school  republicans 
denounced  themselves  for  having  abandoned  their 


ABUSES  OF  NOTE  ISSUES  269 

principles  in  voting  for  a  national  bank.  All  the 
ill-doing  of  the  Bank  they  regarded  as  essential 
elements  in  the  character  of  any  national  bank. 
Niles  denounced  the  whole  system  of  banking,  and 
all  the  banks.  He  had  good  reason.  It  is  almost 
incredible  that  the  legislation  of  any  civilized  conn, 
try  could  have  opened  the  chance  for  such  abuses 
of  credit,  banking,  and  currency  as  then  existed. 
The  franchise  of  issuing  paper  notes  to  be  used  by 
the  people  as  currency,  that  is  to  say,  the  license 
to  appropriate  a  certain  amount  of  the  specie  circu- 
lation of  the  country,  and  to  put  one's  promissory 
notes  in  the  place  of  it,  was  given  away,  not  only 
without  any  equivalent,  but  without  any  guarantee 
at  all.  When  Niles  and  Gouge  denounced  banking 
and  banks,  it  was  because  they  had  in  mind  these 
swindling  institutions.  The  great  Bank  justly 
suffered  with  the  rest,  because  it  had  made  itself 
in  makj  respects  like  them.  The  popular  anti- 
bank  party,  opposed  to  the  money  power,  was  very 
strong  during  the  period  of  liquidation. 

Langdon  Cheves,  of  South  Carolina,  was  elected 
president  of  the  Bank  March  6,  1819.  He  set 
about  restoring  it.  In  three  years  he  had  suc- 
ceeded, although  the  losses  were  over  three  millions. 
Nicholas  Biddle  was  elected  president  of  the  Bank 
in  January,  1823.  He  was  only  thirty-seven  years 
old,  and  had  been  more  a  literary  man  than  any- 
thing else.  He  was  appointed  government  director 
>n  1819.  His  election  in  Cheves's  place  was  the 
result  of  a  conflict  between  a  young  and  progressive 


270  ANDREW  JACKSON 

policy,  which  he  represented,  and  an  old  and  con, 
servative  policy.  At  the  nearest  date  to  January 
1,  1823,  the  bank  had  14,600,000  notes  out; 
84,400,000  specie;  $2,700,000  public  deposits; 
81,500,000  deposits  by  public  officers ;  $3,300,000 
deposits  by  individuals;  128,700,000  bills  dis- 
counted. Congress  refused  to  allow  the  officers  of 
the  branches  to  sign  notes  issued  by  the  branches. 
It  is  not  clear  why  this  petition  was  refused,  except 
that  Congress  was  in  no  mood  to  grant  any  request 
of  the  Bank.  The  labor,  for  the  president  and 
cashier  of  the  parent  bank,  of  signing  all  the  notes 
of  the  Bank  and  branches  was  very  great.  Ac- 
cordingly, in  1827,  branch  drafts  were  devised  to 
avoid  this  inconvenience.  They  were  the  counter- 
part of  bank-notes.  They  were  drawn  for  even 
sums,  by  the  cashier  of  any  branch,  on  the  parent 
bank,  to  the  order  of  some  officer  of  the  branch, 
and  endorsed  by  the  latter  to  bearer.  They  then 
circulated  like  bank-notes.  They  were  at  first 
made  in  denominations  of  $5.00  and  $10.00.  In 
1831  the  denomination  $20.00  was  added.  Binney, 
Wirt,  and  Webster  gave  an  opinion  that  these 
drafts  were  legal.  Rush,  Secretary  of  the  Trea- 
sury, approved  of  them,  and  allowed  public  dues 
to  be  paid  in  them.1  These  branch  drafts  were  a 
most  unlucky  invention,  and  to  them  is  to  be 
traced  most  of  the  subsequent  real  trouble  of  the 
Bank.  The  branches,  especially  the  distant  ones, 
when  they  issued  these  drafts,  did  not  lend  their 
1  Document  B. 


CORRESPONDENCE  OF  INGHAM  AND  BIDDLE  271 

own  capital,  but  that  of  the  Bank  at  Philadelphia. 
At  the  same  time,  therefore,  they  fell  in  debt  to 
the  parent  bank.  This  stimulated  their  issues. 
The  borrowers  used  these  drafts  to  sustain  what 
were  called  "  race-horse  bills."  These  were  drafts 
drawn  between  the  different  places  where  there 
were  branches,  so  that  a  bill  falling  due  at  one 
place  was  met  by  the  discount  of  a  bill  drawn  on 
another  place.  This  system  was  equivalent  to  un- 
limited renewals.  It  kept  up  a  constant  inflation 
of  credit.  Up  to  the  time  of  Jackson's  accession 
these  drafts  had  not  yet  done  much  harm,  and  had 
attracted  no  adverse  criticism. 

At  the  session  of  1827-28,  P.  P.  Barbour 
brought  forward  a  proposition  to  sell  the  stock 
owned  by  the  United  States  in  the  Bank.  A 
debate  arose  concerning  the  Bank,  and  it  seems 
that  there  was  a  desire  on  the  part  of  a  portion  of 
the  opposition  to  put  opposition  to  it  into  their 
platform.1  The  project  failed.  Barbour's  resolu- 
tion was  tabled,  174  to  9. 

The  facts  which  are  now  to  be  narrated  were 
not  known  to  the  public  until  1832.  They  are 
told  here  as  they  occurred  in  the  order  of  time. 

June  27,  1829,  Levi  Woodbury,  senator  from 
New  Hampshire,  wrote  to  Samuel  Ingham,  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  making  confidential  com- 
plaints of  Jeremiah  Mason,  the  new  president  of 
the  Portsmouth,  New  Hampshire,  branch  of  the 
Bank  of  the  United  States,  because  (1)  of  the 

1  33  Niles,  275. 


272  ANDREW  JACKSON 

general  brusqueness  of  his  manner;  (2)  of  his 
severity  and  partiality  in  the  matter  of  loans  and 
collections.  He  added  that  Mason  was  a  friend  of 
Webster.  "His  political  character  is  doubtless 
known  to  you."  He  also  said  that  the  complaints 
were  general  and  from  all  political  parties.  Ing- 
ham  enclosed  the  letter  to  Biddle,  pointing  out 
that  it  seemed  to  have  been  called  out  by  the  polit- 
ical effects  of  the  action  of  the  branch.  He  said 
that  the  administration  wanted  no  favors  from  the 
Bank.  Biddle  replied  that  he  would  investigate. 
One  great  trouble  with  Biddle,  which  appeared 
at  once  in  this  correspondence,  was  that  he  wrote 
too  easily.  When  he  got  a  pen  in  his  hand,  it  ran 
away  with  him.  In  this  first  reply,  he  went  on  to 
write  a  long  letter,  by  which  he  drew  out  all  the 
venomous  rancor  of  Levi  Woodbury  and  Isaac  Hill 
against  the  old  federalists  and  Jeremiah  Mason 
and  the  Bank,  all  which  lurked  in  Ingham's  letter, 
but  came  out  only  in  the  form  of  innuendo  and 
suggestion.  The  innuendoes  stung  Biddle,  and 
he  challenged  the  suggestions  instead  of  ignoring 
them.  Thus  he  gave  them  a  chance  to  come  forth 
without  sneaking.  He  was  jauntily  innocent  and 
unconscious  of  what  spirit  he  was  dealing  with 
and  what  impended  over  him.  He  stated  (1)  that 
Mason  had  been  appointed  to  a  vacancy  caused  by 
the  resignation,  not  by  the  removal,  of  his  prede- 
cessor ;  (2)  that  the  salary  of  the  position  had 
not  been  increased  for  Mason  ;  (3)  that,  after 
Mason's  appointment,  Webster  was  asked  to  per- 


INGHAM  TO  BIDDLE  — 1829  273 

suade  him  to  accept.  He  quoted  a  letter  from 
Woodbury  to  himself,  in  July,  in  which  Woodbury 
said  that  Mason  was  as  unpopular  with  one  party 
as  the  other.  Biddle  inferred,  no  doubt  correctly, 
that  Mason,  as  banker,  had  done  his  duty  by  the 
Bank,  without  regard  to  politics.  He  explained 
that  the  branch  had  previously  not  been  well  man- 
aged, and  that  Mason  was  put  in  as  a  competent 
banker  and  lawyer  to  put  it  right  again.1  It  is 
easy  to  see  that  Mason,  in  order  to  put  the  bank 
right,  had  to  act  severely,  and  that  he  especially 
disappointed  those  who,  on  account  of  political 
sympathy,  expected  favors,  but  did  not  get  them. 
Politics  had  run  high  in  New  Hampshire  for  ten  or 
twelve  years.  Mason  and  Webster  on  one  side, 
and  Hill,  Woodbury,  and  Plumer  on  the  other, 
had  been  in  strong  antagonism.  The  relations  had 
been  amicable  between  some  of  them,  but  Hill  and 
Mason  were  two  men  who  could  not  meet  without 
striking  fire.  Hill  was  now  president  of  a  small 
bank  at  Concord,  and  business  jealousy  was  added 
to  political  animosity.  Woodbury  had  been  elected 

1  Hill,  in  a  speech,  March  3,  1834,  said  :  "  After  the  tariff  law 
of  1828  had  passed,  the  manufacturing  stock  fell,  in  many  cases 
sinking  the  whole  investment,  so  that  where  the  bank  had  had 
no  other  security,  bad  debts  were  made.  .  .  .  The  bank  lost,  in 
bad  debts,  some  $80,000.  .  .  .  [Mason]  in  violation  of  the  terms 
of  payment  on  which  loans  had  been  made,  called  on  all  the  cus- 
tomers of  the  bank  to  pay  four  for  one  of  what  they  were  required 
to  pay  by  the  implied  terms  of  their  first  contract.  ...  It  was 
this  arbitrary  breach  of  faith  with  the  customers  of  the  bank 
that  induced  the  merchants  and  men  of  business  of  all  parties  to 
petition  for  the  removal  of  the  man  who  had  caused  the  distress." 


274  ANDREW  JACKSON 

to  the  Senate  as  an  Adams  man,  and  the  personal 
and  political  feelings  were  only  more  intense,  be- 
cause Adams  was  called  a  republican.  The  feder- 
alists were  first  invited  to  support  him,  then  they 
were  ignored,1  and  Woodbury  and  Hill  were  work- 
ing for  Jackson. 

Biddle,  as  if  dissatisfied  with  whatever  prudence 
he  had  shown  in  his  first  letter,  wrote  another,  in 
which  he  declared  that  the  Bank  had  nothing  to 
do  with  politics ;  that  people  were  all  the  time 
trying  to  draw  it  into  politics,  but  that  it  always 
resisted. 

July  23d  Ingham  wrote  again  to  Biddle,  insist- 
ing that  there  must  be  grounds  of  complaint,  and 
that  exemption  from  party  preference  was  impossi- 
ble. He  added  that  he  represented  the  views  of 
the  administration. 

In  August,  the  Secretary  of  War  ordered  the 
pension  agency  transferred  from  the  Portsmouth 
branch  to  the  bank  at  Concord,  of  which  Isaac 
Hill  had  been  president.  The  parent  bank  for- 
bade the  branch  to  comply  with  this  order,  on  the 
ground  that  it  was  illegal.  The  order  was  re- 
voked. 

September  15th  Biddle  wrote  again  to  Ingham. 
He  had  visited  Buffalo  and  Portsmouth  during  the 
summer.  His  letter  is  sharp  and  independent  in 
tone.  He  says  that  two  memorials  have  been  sent 
to  him  by  Isaac  Hill,  Second  Controller  of  the 
Treasury,  one  from  the  business  men  of  Ports- 

1  1  Webster's  Correspondence,  415,  419. 


THE  BANK  CORRESPONDENCE  275 

mouth,  and  the  other  from  sixty  members  of  the 
Legislature  of  New  Hampshire,  requesting  Mason's 
removal,  and  nominating  a  new  board  of  directors, 
"  friends  of  General  Jackson  in  New  Hampshire." 
Those  proceedings  were  evidently  planned  by  the 
anti-Bank  clique  at  Washington  to  provoke  Biddle. 
He  hastened  to  crown  that  purpose  with  complete 
success.  He  says  that  public  opinion  in  the  com- 
munity around  a  bank  is  no  test  of  bank  manage- 
ment, and  that  the  reported  opinion  at  Portsmouth, 
upon  examination,  "  degenerated  into  the  personal 
hostility  of  a  very  limited,  and  for  the  most  part 
very  prejudiced,  circle."  He  then  takes  up  three 
points  which  he  finds  in  Ingham's  letters,  suggested 
or  assumed,  but  not  formulated.  These  are :  (1) 
That  the  Secretary  has  some  supervision  over  the 
choice  of  officers  of  the  Bank,  which  comes  to  him 
from  the  relations  of  the  government  to  the  Bank. 
(2)  That  there  is  some  action  of  the  government 
on  the  Bank,  which  is  not  precisely  defined,  but  of 
which  the  Secretary  is  the  proper  agent.  (3)  That 
it  is  the  right  and  duty  of  the  Secretary  to  make 
known  to  the  president  of  the  Bank  the  views  of 
the  administration  on  the  political  opinions  of  the 
officers  of  the  Bank.  He  then  says  that  the  board 
acknowledges  no  responsibility  whatever  to  the 
Secretary  in  regard  to  the  political  opinions  of  the 
officers  of  the  Bank ;  that  the  Bank  is  responsible 
to  Congress  only,  and  is  carefully  shielded  by  its 
charter  from  executive  control.  He  indignantly 
denies  that  freedom  from  political  bias  is  impos- 


276  ANDREW  JACKSON 

sible,  shows  the  folly  of  the  notion  of  political 
"  checks  and  counter-balances  "  between  the  officers 
of  the  Bank,  and  declares  that  the  Bank  ought  to 
disregard  all  parties.  He  won  a  complete  victory 
on  the  argument  of  his  points,  but  delivered  him- 
self, on  the  main  issue,  without  reserve  into  the 
hands  of  his  enemies. 

Ingham's  letter  of  October  5th  is  a  masterly 
specimen  of  cool  and  insidious  malice.  In  form  it 
is  smooth,  courteous,  and  plausible,  but  it  is  full  of 
menace  and  deep  hostility.  He  discusses  the  points 
implied  by  him,  but,  in  form,  raised  by  Biddle. 
He  says  that  if  the  Bank  should  abuse  its  powers 
the  Secretary  is  authorized  to  remove  the  deposits. 
Hence  the  three  points  which  Biddle  found  in  his 
former  letter  are  good.  It  does  not  appear  that 
Biddle  ever  thought  of  this  power  as  within  the 
range  of  the  discussion,  or  of  the  exercise  of  this 
power  as  among  the  possibilities.  Ingham  says 
there  are  two  theories  of  the  Bank :  (1)  That  it  is 
exclusively  for  national  purposes  and  for  the  com- 
mon benefit  of  all,  and  that  the  "  employment  of 
private  interests  is  only  an  incident,  —  perhaps 
an  evil,  —  founded  in  mere  convenience  for  care 
and  management."  (2)  That  it  is  intended  "  to 
strengthen  the  arm  of  wealth,  and  counterpoise  the 
influence  of  extended  suffrage  in  the  disposition  of 
public  affairs,"  and  that  the  public  deposits  are 
one  of  its  means  for  performing  this  function.  He 
says  that  there  are  two  means  of  resisting  the  latter 
theory :  the  power  to  remove  the  deposits,  and  the 


THE  BANK  CORRESPONDENCE  277 

power  to  appoint  five  of  the  directors.  He  adds 
that,  if  the  Bank  should  exercise  political  influence, 
that  would  afford  him  the  strongest  motive  for  re- 
moving the  deposits.  Biddle's  reply  of  October 
9th  shows  that  he  recognizes  at  last  what  temper  he 
has  to  deal  with.  He  is  still  gay  and  good-natured, 
and  he  recedes  gracefully,  only  maintaining  that  it 
is  the  policy  of  the  Bank  to  keep  out  of  politics. 

In  Ingham's  letters  of  July  23d  and  October 
5th  is  to  be  found  the  key  to  the  "  Bank  War." 
Ingham  argues  that  the  Bank  cannot  keep  out  of 
politics,  that  its  officers  ought  to  be  taken  from 
both  parties,  and  that,  if  it  meddles  with  politics, 
he  will  remove  the  deposits.  The  only  road  left 
by  which  to  escape  from  the  situation  he  creates  is 
to  go  into  politics  on  his  side.  No  evidence  is 
known  to  exist  that  the  Bank  had  interfered  in 
politics.  The  administration  men  are  distinctly 
seen  in  this  correspondence,  trying  to  drive  it  to 
use  political  influence  on  their  side,  and  the  Bank 
resists,  not  on  behalf  of  the  other  party,  but  on 
behalf  of  its  independence.  It  is  the  second  of 
the  alleged  theories  in  the  letter  of  October  5th, 
however,  which  demands  particular  attention. 
The  Jackson  administration  always  pretended  that 
the  managers  of  the  Bank  construed  the  character 
and  function  of  the  Bank  according  to  that  theory. 
It  is  the  Kentucky  relief  notion  of  the  Bank  in  its 
extreme  and  most  malignant  form.  The  statement 
is,  on  its  face,  invidious  and  malicious.  It  is  not, 
even  in  form,  a  formula  of  functions  attributed  to 


278  ANDREW  JACKSON 

the  Bank.  It  is  a  construction  of  the  political 
philosophy  of  a  national  bank.  It  is  not  parallel 
with  the  first  statement.  It  was  ridiculous  to  al- 
lege that  the  stockholders  of  the  Bank  had  sub- 
scribed twenty-eight  million  dollars,  not  even  for 
party  purposes,  but  to  go  crusading  against  demo- 
cracy and  universal  suffrage.  However,  the  justice 
or  injustice  of  the  allegations  in  these  letters,  which 
could  be  submitted  to  no  tribunal,  and  which  touched 
motives,  not  acts,  was  immaterial.  The  adminis- 
tration had  determined  to  make  war  on  the  Bank. 
The  ultimate  agents  were  Amos  Kendall,  who 
brought  the  Kentucky  relief  element,  and  Isaac 
Hill,  who  brought  the  element  of  local  bank  jeal- 
ousy and  party  rancor.  Ingham  published,  in 
1832,1  after  the  above  correspondence  had  been 
published,  an  "  Address "  in  his  own  defence. 
He  says  that  he  found,  to  his  surprise,  soon  after 
he  entered  Jackson's  cabinet,  that  the  President 
and  those  nearest  in  his  confidence  felt  animosity 
against  the  Bank.  He  saw  that  the  persons  who 
had  the  most  feeling  influenced  the  President's 
mind  the  most.  Allegations  of  fact  were  reported 
in  regard  to  political  interference  by  the  Bank. 
Ingham  says  that  when  he  was  urged  to  action 
about  the  Bank  he  tried  to  trace  down  these  stories 
to  something  tangible.  He  quotes  the  only  state- 
ment he  ever  got.  It  is  a  letter  by  Amos  Kendall, 
giving  second  or  third  hand  reports  of  the  use  of 
money  by  officers  of  the  Bank  in  the  Kentucky 
1  42  Niles,  315. 


HINTS  OF  THE  COMING  BANK  WAR      279 

election  of  1825,  when  the  old  and  new  court  ques- 
tion was  at  issue.1  The  man  whom  Kendall  gave 
as  his  authority  failed,  when  called  upon,  to  sub- 
stantiate the  assertion.  In  Kendall's  Autobiogra- 
phy there  is  a  gap  from  1823  to  1829,  and  the 
origin  of  his  eager  hostility  to  the  Bank  is  not 
known.  Jackson  is  not  known  to  have  had  any 
opinion  about  the  Bank  when  he  came  to  Washing- 
ton. He  is  not  known  to  have  had  any  collision 
with  the  Bank,  except  that,  when  he  was  on  his 
way  to  Florida,  as  Governor,  the  branch  at  New 
Orleans  refused  his  request  that  it  would  advance 
money  to  him  on  his  draft  on  the  Secretary  of 
State  at  its  face  value.2  Hill  and  Kendall,  either 
by  telling  Jackson  that  the  Bank  had  worked 
against  him  in  the  election,  or  by  other  means,  in- 
fused into  his  mind  the  hostility  to  it  which  had 
long  rankled  in  theirs.  They  were  soon  ree'n- 
forced  by  Blair,  who  was  stronger  than  either,  and 
more  zealously  hostile  to  the  Bank  than  either. 

In  November,  1829,  about  a  week  before  Congress 
met,  Amos  Kendall  sent  privately  3  a  letter  to  the 
"  Courier  and  Enquirer,"  Jackson  organ  at  New 
York,  in  which  he  insinuated  that  Jackson  would 
come  out  against  the  Bank  in  the  annual  message. 
A  head  and  tail  piece  were  put  to  this  letter,  and 
it  was  put  in  as  an  editorial.  It  attracted  some 
attention,  but,  its  origin  being  of  course  unknown, 
it  was  received  with  a  great  deal  of  scepticism. 

1  See  page  164.  2  2  Parton,  596. 

8  Memoirs  of  Bennett,  111. 


280  ANDREW  JACKSON 

In  its  form  it  consisted  of  a  series  of  queries,1  of 
which  the  following  may  be  quoted  as  the  most 
significant,  and  as  best  illustrating  the  methods  of 
procedure  introduced  in  Jackson's  administration. 
We  must  remember  that  these  queries  were  drawn 
up  by  a  man  in  the  closest  intimacy  with  the 
President,  who  helped  to  make  the  message  what 
it  was,  and  we  must  further  remember  what  we 
have  already  learned  of  William  B.  Lewis's  meth- 
ods. "  Will  sundry  banks  throughout  the  Union 
take  measures  to  satisfy  the  general  government 
of  their  safety  in  receiving  deposits  of  the  reve- 
nue, and  transacting  the  banking  concerns  of  the 
United  States?  Will  the  Legislatures  of  the 
several  States  adopt  resolutions  on  the  subject, 
and  instruct  their  senators  how  to  vote  ?  Will  a 
proposition  be  made  to  authorize  the  government 
to  issue  exchequer  bills,  to  the  amount  of  the  an- 
nual revenue,  redeemable  at  pleasure,  to  constitute 
a  circulating  medium  equivalent  to  the  notes  issued 
by  the  United  States  Bank  ?  "  So  far  as  appears, 
no  one  saw  in  these  queries  the  oracle  which  was 
foretelling  the  history  of  the  United  States  for  the 
next  ten  or  fifteen  years. 

Jackson's  first  annual  message  contained  a  para- 
graph on  the  Bank  which  struck  the  whole  country 
with  astonishment.  "  We  had  seen,"  says  Niles, 
"  one  or  two  dark  paragraphs  in  certain  of  the 
newspapers,  which  led  to  a  belief  that  the  adminis- 
tration was  not  friendly  to  this  great  moneyed 
1  It  is  quoted  37  Niles,  378.  (January  30,  1830.) 


CRITICISM  OF  THE  MESSAGE  281 

institution,  but  few  had  any  suspicion  'that  it 
would  form  one  of  the  topics  of  the  first  mes- 
sage." 1  After  mentioning  the  fact  that  the  char- 
ter would  expire  in  1836,  and  that  a  recharter 
would  be  asked  for,  the  message  said  that  such  an 
important  question  could  not  too  soon  be  brought 
before  Congress.  "  Both  the  constitutionality  and 
the  expediency  of  the  law  creating  this  bank  are 
well  questioned  by  a  large  portion  of  our  fellow 
citizens,  and  it  must  be  admitted  by  all  that  it  has 
failed  in  the  great  end  of  establishing  a  uniform 
and  sound  currency."  The  question  is  then  raised 
whether  a  bank  could  not  be  devised,  "  founded 
on  the  credit  of  the  government  and  its  revenues," 
which  should  answer  all  the  useful  purposes  of  the 
Bank  of  the  United  States. 

No  period  in  the  history  of  the  United  States 
could  be  mentioned  when  the  country  was  in  a 
state  of  more  profound  tranquillity,  both  in  its 
domestic  and  foreign  relations,  and  in  a  condition 
of  more  humdrum  prosperity  in  its  industry,  than 
1829.  The  currency  never  had  been  as  good  as  it 
was  then,  for  the  troubles  of  the  early  '20's,  both 
in  the  East  and  in  the  West,  had  been  to  a  great 
extent  overcome.2  The  currency  has  never,  since 
1829,  been  better  and  more  uniform,  if  we  take  the 
whole  country  over,  than  it  was  then.  The  pro- 
ceedings, of  which  the  paragraph  in  the  message 

1  37  Niles,  257. 

2  See  the   tables  in  2  Macgregor,   1140;  also  Gallatin  on  the 
Currency  and  Banking  System  of  the  United  States. 


282  ANDREW  JACKSON 

of  1829  was  the  first  warning,  threw  the  currency 
and  banking  of  the  country  into  confusion  and  un- 
certainty, one  thing  following  upon  another,  and 
they  have  never  yet  recovered  the  character  of  es- 
tablished order  and  routine  operation  which  they 
had  then.  The  Bank  charter  was  not  to  expire 
until  March  3,  1836  ;  that  is,  three  years  beyond 
the  time  when  Jackson's  term  would  expire.  He 
seems  to  apologize  for  haste  in  bringing  up  the 
question  of  its  renewal.  It  certainly  was  a  prema- 
ture step,  and  can  be  explained  only  by  the  degree 
of  feeling  which  the  active  agents  had  mingled 
with  their  opinions  about  the  Bank.  It  was, 
moreover,  a  new  mode  of  statement  for  the  Presi- 
dent to  address  Congress,  not  on  his  own  motion, 
and  in  order  to  set  forth  his  own  opinions  and  re- 
commendations, but  as  the  mouth-piece  of  "  a  large 
portion  of  our  fellow  citizens."  Who  were  they  ? 
How  many  were  they  ?  How  had  they  made  their 
opinions  known  to  the  President  ?  Why  did  they 
not  use  the  press  or  the  Legislature,  as  usual,  for 
making  known  their  opinions?  Who  must  be  dealt 
with  in  discussing  the  opinions,  the  President  or 
the  "large  portion,"  etc.?  What  becomes  of  the 
constitutional  responsibility  of  the  President,  if  he 
does  not  speak  for  himself,  but  gets  his  notions 
before  Congress  as  a  quotation  from  somebody 
else,  and  that  somebody  "  a  large  portion  of  our 
fellow  citizens"?  Then  again  the  question  must 
arise  :  Does  the  President  correctly  quote  anybody  ? 
No  proofs  can  be  found  that  any  hundred  persons 


CRITICISM  OF  THE  MESSAGE  283 

in  the  United  States  had  active  doubts  of  the  con- 
stitutionality and  expediency  of  the  Bank,  or  were 
looking  forward  to  its  recharter  as  a  political  crisis 
to  be  prepared  for.  If  the  theoretical  question 
had  been  raised,  a  great  many  people  would  have 
said  that  they  thought  a  national  bank  unconstitu- 
tional. They  would  have  said,  as  any  one  must 
say  now,  that  there  was  no  power  given  in  the 
Constitution  to  buy  territory,  but  they  did  not  pro- 
pose to  give  up  Louisiana  and  Florida.  Just  so  in 
regard  to  a  national  bank.  The  Supreme  Court 
had  decided  in  McCulloch  vs.  Maryland  that  the 
Bank  charter  was  constitutional,  and  that  was  the 
end  of  controversy.  The  question  of  the  constitu- 
tionality of  the  Bank  had  no  actuality,  and  occupied 
no  place  in  public  opinion,  so  far  as  one  can  learn 
from  newspapers,  books,  speeches,  diaries,  corre- 
spondence, or  other  evidence  we  have  of  what  oc- 
cupied the  minds  of  the  people.  Jackson's  state- 
ment was  only  a  figure  of  speech.  The  observation 
which  is  most  important  for  a  fair  judgment  of  his 
policy  of  active  hostility  to  the  Bank  is,  that  any 
great  financial  institution  or  system  which  is  in 
operation,  and  is  performing  its  functions  endura- 
bly,  has  a  great  presumption  in  its  favor.  The 
only  reasonable  question  for  statesman  or  financier 
is  that  of  slow  and  careful  correction  and  improve- 
ment. The  man  who  sets  out  to  overturn  and  de- 
stroy, in  obedience  to  "  a  principle,"  especially  if 
he  shows  that  he  does  not  know  the  possible  scope 
of  his  own  action,  or  what  he  intends  to  construct 


284  ANDREW  JACKSON 

afterwards,  assumes  a  responsibility  which  no  pub- 
lic man  has  any  right  to  take. 

The  vague  and  confused  proposition  of  the  Pres- 
ident for  some  new  kind  of  bank  added  alarm  to 
astonishment.  What  did  he  mean  by  his  bank 
based  on  the  credit  and  revenues  of  the  govern- 
ment ?  It  sounded  like  a  big  paper-money  machine. 
If  there  was  any  intelligible  idea  in  it,  it  referred 
to  something  like  the  Bank  of  the  Commonwealth 
of  Kentucky  on  a  still  larger  scale.  It  will  be  no- 
ticed that  this  notion  of  a  national  bank  coincided 
with  the  suggestion,  in  Kendall's  queries,1  of  a  cur- 
rency of  exchequer  bills.  The  stock  of  the  Bank 
declined  from  125  to  116  on  account  of  the  mes- 
sage.2 It  was  supposed  that  the  President  must 
have  knowledge  of  some  facts  about  the  Bank. 

The  part  of  the  message  about  the  Bank  was  re- 
ferred in  both  Houses.  April  13,  1830,3  McDuffie 
made  a  long  report  from  the  Committee  on  Ways 
and  Means.  He  argued  that  the  constitutionality 
of  the  Bank  was  settled  by  the  decision  of  the 
Supreme  Court  and  by  prescription.  He  defended 
the  history  and  expediency  of  the  Bank,  and  ended 
by  declaring  the  bank  proposed  by  the  President 
to  be  very  dangerous  and  inexpedient,  both  finan- 
cially and  politically,  —  the  latter  because  it  would 
increase  the  power  of  the  Executive.  In  the  Sen- 
ate, Smith,  of  Maryland,  reported  from  the  Com- 
mittee on  Finance  in  favor  of  the  Bank.4  The 

1  See  page  280.  2  38  Niles,  177. 

8  38  Niles,  183.  *  38  Niles,  126. 


ACTION  OF  CONGRESS  ON  THE  BANK    285 

House,  May  10,  1830,  tabled,  by  89  to  66,  resolu- 
tions that  the  House  would  not  consent  to  renew 
the  charter  of  the  Bank ;  and  on  May  29th  it 
tabled,  95  to  67,  a  series  of  resolutions  calling  for 
a  comprehensive  report  of  the  proceedings  of  the 
Bank.  As  yet  there  were  no  allegations  against 
the  management  of  the  Bank.  The  stock  rose  to 
130  on  the  reports  of  the  committees  of  Congress. 

A  great  many  politicians  had  to  "  turn  a  sharp 
corner,"  as  Niles  expressed  it,  when  Jackson  came 
out  against  the  Bank.  His  supporters  in  Pennsyl- 
vania cities  were  nearly  all  Bank  men.  Van  Buren, 
Marcy,  and  Butler  had  signed  a  petition,  in  1826, 
for  a  branch  of  the  bank  at  Albany.1  The  petition 
was  refused.  In  January,  1829,  Van  Buren,  as 
Governor  of  New  York,  referred  to  banks  under 
federal  control  as  objectionable.  The  administra- 
tion party  was  not  yet  consolidated.  It  was  still 
only  that  group  of  factions  which  had  united  in 
opposition  to  Adams.  The  Bank  question  was  one 
of  the  great  questions  through  which  Jackson's 
popularity  and  his  will  drilled  them  into  a  solid 
party  phalanx.  All  had  to  conform  to  the  lines 
which  he  drew  for  the  party,  under  the  influence  of 
Kendall,  Lewis,  and  Hill.  If  they  did  not  do  so, 
they  met  with  speedy  discipline. 

In  his  message  for  1830,  Jackson  again  inserted 
a  paragraph  about  the  Bank,  and  proposed  a  Bank 
as  a  "  branch  of  the  Treasury  Department."  The 
outline  is  very  vague,  but  it  approaches  the  sub- 

1  Mackeinzie,  98. 


286  ANDREW  JACKSON 

treasury  idea.  No  notice  was  taken  of  this  part 
of  the  message  in  the  session  of  1830-31.  On  a 
test  question,  whether  to  refer  the  part  of  the  mes- 
sage relating  to  the  Bank  to  the  Committee  on 
Ways  and  Means  or  to  a  select  committee,  the 
Bank  triumphed,  108  to  67. 

At  the  time  of  Tyler's  struggle  with  Congress, 
about  his  "Exchequer"  plan,  1841,  he  tried  to 
win  strength  for  it  by  connecting  it  with  the  re- 
commendation of  Jackson.  This  led  Jackson  to 
write  to  Lewis,  January  1,  1842,  as  follows :  — 

"  I  informed  you  in  my  last,  that  I  regretted  that  part 
of  the  Presidents  message,  that  recommended  a  paper 
currency  of  treasury  notes,  and  as  the  President  has 
observed  that  it  was  shadowed  forth  by  my  message  of 
1830,  I  sincerely  regret  that  he  did  not  fully  embrace 
the  propositions  therein  set  forth  —  Turn  to  it,  and  you 
will  find  that  there  is  no  expression  there  that  will 
justify  the  idea  of  Congress  making  a  paper  currency  of 
any  kind,  much  less  by  issue  of  Treasury  notes  —  and  it 
is  impossible  to  make  out  of  any  paper  system,  a  sound 
circulating  and  uniform  currency.  You  are  certainly 
right  that  the  mode  presented  is  much  better  than  a 
national  Bank,  such  as  Biddies,  because  it  admits  ex- 
pressly that  congress  has  the  right  to  alter  or  repeal  it." 

A  fortnight  later,  he  added  :  — 

"  I  discover  that  Mr  Rives  has  adverted  to  my  mes- 
sage of  1830  in  support  of  the  measures  recommended. 
I  regretted  to  see  this  —  it  shows  him  uncandid,  because 
there  is  no  likeness  between  them.  In  my  message  there 
ia  no  recommendation  to  issue  treasury  notes,  or  to  dis- 


ACTION  OF  CONGRESS  ON  THE  BANK    287 

count  bills  of  exchange  or  to  purchase  property,  with 
power  only  to  remit  the  funds  of  the  government.  My 
explanatory  remarks  shews  this  —  I  remark,  "  This  not 
being  a  corporate  body,  having  no  stockholders,  debtors, 
or  property,  could  not  become  dangerous  to  our  country 
&c  &c,  as  incorporated  Banks  with  all  their  mamoth 
powers  &c  &c  —  In  mine  there  were  to  be  no  paper,  no 
debtors,  a  cash  business,  where  there  could  be  no  loss  to 
the  government  —  The  word  Bank  was  used  by  me  in 
its  proper  sense  to  distinguish  it  from  an  incorporated 
Bank  —  a  place  where  the  money  of  the  government  was 
to  be  kept,  to  clearly  show  that  it  was  to  have  no  stock- 
holders, no  power  to  issue  paper,  discount  or  exchange 
and  if  Mr  Rives  will  read  all  my  messages  and  my  fare- 
well address  which  was  intended  to  give  my  full  views 
on  Banking  he  will  find  he  has  done  me  great  injustice 
in  referring  to  my  messages,  as  authority  for  the  fiscal 
plan  proposed  by  President  Tyler.  Every  one  who 
knows  me,  must  be  aware  of  my  universal  hostility 
against  all  government  paper  currency  —  The  old  con- 
tinental currency,  was  sufficient  to  convince  me  that  a 
greater  curse  could  not  visit  a  nation  than  a  paper  cur- 
rency — " l 

There  is  a  bank-plan  in  print  which  is  attributed 
to  Jackson.2 

Benton  offered  a  joint  resolution,  in  the  Senate, 
February  2,  1831,  "  That  the  charter  of  the  Bank 
of  the  United  States  ought  not  to  be  renewed." 
The  Senate  refused  leave,  23  to  20,  to  introduce 
it.  In  July,  1831,  the  Secretary  of  War  ordered 
the  pension  funds  for  the  State  of  New  York  to  be 

l  Ford  MSS.  2  IngersoU,  283. 


288  ANDREW  JACKSON 

removed  from  the  New  York  branch.  Biddle  re- 
monstrated, because  there  was  no  authority  of  law 
for  the  order,  and  the  Auditor  had  refused  to  accept 
such  an  order  as  a  voucher  in  a  previous  case. 
Secretary  Cass  revoked  the  order,  March  1,  1832. 
In  the  message  of  1831  Jackson  referred  to  the 
Bank  question  as  one  on  which  he  had  discharged 
his  duty  and  freed  his  responsibility.  The  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  McLane,  in  his  annual  report, 
December,  1831,  made  a  long  and  strong  argument 
in  favor  of  the  Bank.  If  we  may  judge  from  the 
tone  of  the  message  of  1831,  Jackson  was  willing 
to  allow  the  Bank  question  to  drop,  at  least  until 
the  presidential  election  should  be  over.  There  is 
even  room  for  a  suspicion  that  McLane's  argument 
in  favor  of  the  Bank  was  a  sort  of  "  hedging ; " 
for  although  the  Secretary's  report  was  not  neces- 
sarily submitted  to  the  President,1  Jackson  was 
hardly  the  man  to  allow  a  report  to  be  sent  in  of 
which  he  disapproved. 

353. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  CAMPAIGN  OF   1832 

CLAY  was  the  leading  man  in  the  opposition, 
but  the  opposition  was  by  no  means  united.  A 
new  factor  had  been  gaining  importance  in  politics 
for  the  last  few  years.  The  politicians  had  ignored 
it  and  sneered  at  it,  but  it  had  continued  to  grow, 
and  was  now  strong  enough  to  mar,  if  it  could  not 
make,  a  national  election. 

In  1826  a  bricklayer,  named  William  Morgan, 
who  lived  at  Batavia,  N.  Y.,  and  was  very  poor, 
thought  that  he  could  earn  something  by  writing 
an  exposure  of  the  secrets  of  free-masonry,1  he 
being  a  mason.  The  masons  learned  that  he  had 
written  such  a  book.  They  caused  his  arrest  and 
imprisonment  over  Sunday  on  a  frivolous  civil 
complaint,  and  searched  his  house  for  the  manu- 
script during  his  absence.  A  month  later  he  was 
arrested  again  for  a  debt  of  $2.10,  and  imprisoned 
under  an  execution  for  $2.69,  debt  and  costs. 
The  next  day  the  creditor  declared  the  debt  satis- 
fied. Morgan  was  released,  passed  at  the  prison 
door  into  the  hands  of  masked  men,  was  placed  in 

1  Report  of  the  Special  Agent  of  the  State  of  New  York.    5 
Ann.  Beg.  537. 


290  ANDREW  JACKSON 

a  carriage,  taken  to  Fort  Niagara,  and  detained 
there.  A  few  days  later  a  body  was  found  floating 
in  the  river,  which  was  identified  as  Morgan's 
body.  The  masons  always  denied  that  this  identi- 
fication was  correct.  Morgan  has  never  been  seen 
or  heard  of  sinoe.  in  January,  1827,  certain 
persons  were  tried  for  conspiracy  and  abduction. 
They  pleaded  guilty,  and  so  prevented  a  disclosure 
of  details.1  The  masons  confessed  and  admitted 
abduction,  but  declared  that  Morgan  was  not  dead. 
The  opinion  that  Morgan  had  been  murdered,  and 
that  the  body  found  was  his,  took  possession  of  the 
minds  of  those  people  of  western  New  York  who 
were  not  masons.  Popular  legend  and  political 
passion  have  become  so  interwoven  with  the  ori- 
ginal mystery  that  the  truth  cannot  now  be  known. 
The  outrage  on  Morgan  aroused  great  indigna- 
tion in  western  New  York,  then  still  a  simple 
frontier  country.  Public  opinion  acted  on  all  sub- 
jects. A  committee  appointed  at  a  mass-meeting 
undertook  an  extra-legal  investigation,  and  soon 
brought  the  matter  into  such  shape  that  no  legal 
tribunal  ever  after  had  much  chance  of  unravelling 
it.  After  the  fashion  of  the  time,  and  of  the  place 
also,  a  political  color  was  immediately  given  to  the 
affair.  As  Spencer,  the  special  agent  appointed 
by  the  State  to  investigate  the  matter,  declared  in 
his  report,  the  fact  of  this  political  coloring  was 
disastrous  to  the  cause  of  justice.  The  politicians 

1  2  Hammond,  376.    See,  however,  the  trial  reported  4  Ann. 
Reg.  68. 


OUTRAGE  ON  MORGAN  291 

tried  to  put  down  the  whole  excitement,  because  it 
traversed  their  plans  and  combinations.  They 
asked,  with  astonishment  and  with  justice,  what 
the  affair  had  to  do  with  politics.  The  popular 
feeling,  however,  was  very  strong,  and  it  was  fed 
by  public  meetings,  committee  reports,  etc.  The 
monstrous  outrage  deserved  that  a  strong  public 
opinion  should  sustain  the  institutions  of  justice  in 
finding  out  and  punishing  the  perpetrators.  Some 
of  the  officers  were  too  lax  and  indifferent  in  the 
discharge  of  their  duties  to  suit  the  public  temper. 
They  were  masons.  Hence  the  inference  that  a 
man  who  was  a  mason  was  not  fit  or  competent  to 
be  entrusted  with  public  duties.  The  political 
connection  was  thus  rendered  logical  and  at  least 
plausible.  Many  persons  resolved  not  to  vote  for 
any  one  who  was  a  mason  for  any  public  office. 
Moreover,  the  excitement  offered  an  unexampled 
opportunity  to  the  ambitious  young  orators  and 
politicians  of  the  day.  It  was  a  case  where  pure 
heat  and  emphasis  were  the  only  requirements  of 
the  orator.  He  need  not  learn  anything,  or  have 
any  ideas.  A  number  of  men  rose  to  prominence 
on  the  movement  who  had  no  claims  whatever  to 
public  influence.  They  of  course  stimulated  as 
much  as  they  could  the  popular  excitement  against 
masonry,  which  furnished  them  their  opportunity 
and  their  capital.  Many  masons  withdrew  from 
the  order.  Others  foolishly  made  light  of  the 
outrage  itself.  For  the  most  part,  however,  the 
masons  argued  that  masonry  was  no  more  respon* 


292  ANDREW  JACKSON 

sible,  as  an  institution,  for  the  outrage  on  Morgan 
than  the  Christian  church  is  responsible  for  the 
wrongs  done  in  its  name  by  particular  persons  and 
groups.  These  discussions  only  sharpened  the 
issue,  and  masons  and  anti-masons  came  to  be  a 
division  which  cut  across  all  the  old  party  lines  in 
the  State  of  New  York.  In  1828  the  anti-masons 
were  the  old  Clintonians,1  the  rump  of  the  federal- 
ists, and  many  buck-tails,  with  whom  horror  at  the 
Morgan  outrage  was  a  controlling  motive.  Jack- 
son, Clinton,  and  Van  Buren  were  then  allied. 
Jackson  and  Clinton  were  masons.  The  Clinton- 
ians who  would  not  follow  Clinton  to  the  support 
of  Jackson,  either  because  they  disliked  the  man, 
or  because  he  was  a  mason,  and  the  buck-tails  who 
would  not  vote  for  a  mason,  were  Adams  men. 
The  great  body  of  the  buck-tails  (amongst  whom 
party  discipline  was  stronger  than  in  any  other 
faction),  the  Clintonians  who  followed  Clinton 
into  the  Jackson  camp,  and  the  masons  who  let 
defence  of  the  order  control  their  politics,  were 
Jackson  men.  Hence  the  New  York  vote  (which 
was  taken  by  districts  in  1828)  was  divided. 

The  regency  buck-tail  democrats,  being  in  control 
of  the  State  government,  tried  to  put  down  the 
excitement  by  indirect  means,  because  of  its  dis- 
organizing effects.  This  made  them  appear  to 
suppress  inquiry,  and  to  be  indifferent  to  the  out- 
rage. It  only  fanned  the  flame  of  popular  in- 
dignation, and  strengthened  anti-masonry.  The 

1  Clinton  died  February  11,  1828. 


POLITICAL  EFFECTS  OF  ANTI-MASONRY    293 

anti-masons  came  out  as  an  anti-administration 
party  in  1830.  They  held  a  convention  at  Utica 
in  August,  and  framed  a  platform  of  national 
principles.  This  is  the  first  "platform,"  as  dis- 
tinguished from  the  old-fashioned  address.  The 
anti-masons  had  come  together  under  no  other 
bond  than  opposition  to  masonry.  If  they  were  to 
be  a  permanent  party,  and  a  national  party,  they 
needed  to  find  or  make  some  political  principles. 
This  was  their  great  political  weakness  and  the 
sure  cause  of  their  decay.  Their  party  had  no 
root  in  political  convictions.  It  had  its  root  else- 
where, and  in  very  thin  soil  too,  for  a  great  political 
organization.  Since  the  masons  were  not  con- 
stantly and  by  the  life  principle  of  their  order  per- 
petrators of  outrages  and  murders,  they  could  not 
furnish  regular  fuel  to  keep  up  the  indignation  of 
the  anti-masons.  The  anti-masons,  then,  adopted 
their  principles  as  an  after-thought ;  and  for  this 
reason  they  needed  an  explicit  statement  of  them 
in  a  categorical  form,  ~i.  e.,  a  platform,  far  more 
than  this  would  be  needed  by  a  party  which  had 
an  historical  origin,  and  traditions  derived  from 
old  political  controversies.  Anti-masonry  spread 
rapidly  through  New  York  and  large  parts  of  Penn- 
sylvania and  Massachusetts.  Vermont  became  a 
stronghold  of  it.  It  is  by  no  means  extinct  there 
now.  It  had  considerable  strength  in  Connect- 
icut and  Ohio.  It  widened  into  hostility  to  all 
secret  societies  and  extra-judicial  oaths.  Perhaps 
it  reached  its  acme  when  it  could  lead  men  like 


294  ANDREW  JACKSON 

J.  Q.  Adams  and  Joseph  Story  to  spend  days 
in  discussing  plans  for  abolishing  the  secrecy  of 
the  Phi  Beta  Kappa  society  of  Harvard  College.1 
That  action  of  theirs  only  showed  to  what  extent 
every  man  is  carried  away  by  the  currents  of 
thought  and  interest  which  prevail  for  the  time 
being  in  the  community. 

The  anti-masons  next  invented  the  national  polit- 
ical convention.2  They  held  one  at  Philadelphia, 
September  11,  1830,3  which  called  another,  to 
meet  September  26,  1831,  at  Baltimore,  to  nomi- 
nate candidates  for  President  and  Vice-President. 
At  the  latter  date  112  delegates  met.4  William 
Wirt,  of  Maryland,  was  nominated  for  President, 
and  Amos  Ellmaker,  of  Pennsylvania,  for  Vice- 
President,  almost  unanimously.  Wirt  had  been  a 
mason,  and  had  neglected,  not  abandoned,  the 
order.  In  his  letter  of  acceptance6  he  said  that 
he  had  often  spoken  of  "  masonry  and  anti-masonry 
as  a  fitter  subject  for  farce  than  tragedy."  He 
circumscribed  and  tamed  "down  the  whole  anti- 
masonic  movement,  and  put  himself  on  no  platform 

1  8  Adams,  383. 

2  A  convention  of  delegates  from  eleven  States  nominated  De 
Witt  Clinton,  in  1812.     Binns  (page  244)  claims  to  have  invented 
the  national  convention,  but   his  was  a  project   for  introducing 
into  the  congressional  caucus  of  the  republican  party  special  dele- 
gates from  the  non-republican  States,  so  as  to  make  that  body 
represent  the  whole  party. 

8  39  Niles,  58. 

4  41  Niles,  83,  107.     Twelve  States  were  represented.    W.  H. 
Beward  and  Thaddeus  Stevens  were  in  the  convention. 
6  2  Kennedy's  Wirt,  350. 


ANTI-MASONIC   NOMINATIONS  295 

save  hostility  to  oaths  which  might  interfere  with 
a  man's  civic  duties.  He  put  the  whole  Morgan 
case  aside,  except  so  far  as,  on  the  trial,  it  appeared 
that  masonry  hindered  justice.  The  anti-masons 
were,  in  fact,  aiming  at  political  power.  They 
had  before  them  the  names  of  McLean,  Calhoun, 
and  J.  Q.  Adams.1  New  York  wanted  McLean. 
He  declined.2  The  anti-masonic  convention  pub- 
lished a  long  address,  setting  forth  the  history 
and  principles  of  the  party.3  There  was  a  hope, 
in  which  Wirt  seems  to  have  shared,  that  when 
the  anti-masons  presented  a  separate  nomination 
Clay  would  withdraw,  and  the  national  republicans 
would  take  up  Wirt.4  When  this  hope  had  passed 
away,  Wirt  wanted  to  withdraw,  but  could  not  do 
so.5  He  had  from  the  first  desired  Clay's  election, 
and  had  agreed  to  stand,  only  when  assured  that 
Clay  could  not  unite  the  anti-Jackson  men.  Clay 
refused  to  answer  the  interrogatories  of  the  anti- 
masons.  He  said,  "  I  do  not  know  a  solitary  pro- 
vision in  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
which  conveys  the  slightest  authority  to  the  general 
government  to  interfere,  one  way  or  the  other, 
with  either  masonry  or  anti-masonry."  He  said 
that  if  the  President  should  meddle  with  that  mat- 
ter he  would  be  a  usurper  and  a  tyrant.6 

i  8  Adams,  412,  416.          2  41  Niles,  259.  3  41  Niles,  166. 

4  Judge  Spencer  thought  that  Wirt  could  unite  the  opposition, 
if  Clay  would  stand  back,  and  that  Wirt  could  be  elected  ovef 
Jackson.     1  Curtis's  Webster,  402. 

5  2  Kennedy's  Wirt,  356,  362,  366. 

6  41  Niles,  260;  8  Adams,  430. 


206  ANDREW  JACKSON 

The  opposition  therefore  went  into  the  contest 
divided  and  discordant.  The  anti-masons  were 
strong  enough  to  produce  that  state  of  things,  and 
of  course  their  conduct  showed  that  the  opposition 
was  not  united  on  any  political  policy  whatever. 
Jackson,  on  the  contrary,  had  been  consolidating 
a  party,  which  had  a  strong  consciousness  of  its 
power  and  its  purpose,  and  a  vigorous  party  will. 
Jackson  had  the  credit  of  recovering  the  West 
India  trade,  settling  the  spoliation  claims,  and 
placing  all  foreign  relations  on  a  good  footing. 
He  also  claimed  that  he  had  carried  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  government  back  to  the  Jeffersonian 
ideas.  In  general  this  meant  that  he  held  to  the 
non-interference  theory  of  government,  and  to  the 
policy  of  leaving  people  to  be  happy  in  their  own 
way.  He  had  not  yet  been  forced  to  commit  him- 
self on  land  and  tariff,  although  he  had  favored  a 
liberal  policy  about  land  ;  but  on  internal  improve- 
ments he  had  spoken  clearly,  and  inferences  were 
freely  drawn  as  to  what  he  would  do  on  land  and 
tariff.  He  had  favored  State  rights  and  strict 
construction  in  all  the  cases  which  had  arisen. 
He  had  discountenanced  all  heavy  expenditures 
on  so-called  national  objects,  and  had  prosecuted 
as  rapidly  as  possible  the  payment  of  the  debt. 
Here  was  a  strong  record  and  a  consistent  one  on 
a  number  of  great  points  of  policy,  and  that,  of 
course,  is  what  is  needed  to  form  a  party.  The 
record  also  furnished  two  or  three  good  party 
cries.  Further,  the  general  non-interference  policy 


JACKSON'S  PARTY  297 

strengthens  any  government  which  recurs  to  it; 
though  all  governments  in  time  depart  from  it,  be- 
cause they  always  credit  themselves  with  power  to 
do  better  for  the  people  than  the  people  can  do 
for  themselves.  In  1831-32  Jackson  had  not  yet 
reached  this  stage  in  his  career.  The  delicate 
points  in  his  record  were  tariff  and  Bank.  If  he 
assailed  the  tariff,  would  he  not  lose  Pennsylvania, 
Ohio,  and  Kentucky  ?  If  he  favored  it,  would  he 
not  lose  the  South?  This  was  the  old  division 
in  the  body  of  his  supporters,  and  it  seemed  that 
he  might  now  be  ruined  if  that  cleft  were  opened. 
Also,  if  he  went  on  with  the  "  Bank  War,"  would 
he  not  lose  Pennsylvania?  His  mild  message  on 
the  Bank  in  1831  seemed  to  indicate  fear. 

Clay  declared  unhesitatingly  that  the  campaign 
required  that  the  opposition  should  force  the  fight- 
ing on  tariff  and  Bank,  especially  on  the  latter. 
We  have  seen l  what  his  demeanor  and  demands 
were  in  the  conference  at  Washington.  For  the 
fight  out-of-doors  he  thought  that  the  recharter  of 
the  Bank  was  the  strongest  issue  he  could  make. 
Of  course  Benton's  assertion 2  that  the  Bank  at- 
tacked Jackson  is  a  ridiculous  misrepresentation. 
Clay  did,  however,  seize  upon  the  question  which 
Jackson  had  raised  about  the  Bank,  and  he  risked 
that  important  financial  institution  on  the  fortunes 
of  a  political  campaign.  The  Bank  was  very  un- 
willing to  be  so  used.  Its  disinterested  friends  in 
both  parties  strongly  dissuaded  Biddle  from  allow* 
l  Page  262.  «  IBenton,  227. 


298  ANDREW  JACKSON 

ing  the  question  of  recharter  to  be  brought  into  the 
campaign.1  Clay's  advisers  also  tried  to  dissuade 
him.  The  Bank,  however,  could  not  oppose  the 
public  man  on  whom  it  depended  most,  and  the 
party  leaders  deferred  at  last  to  their  chief.  Jack- 
son never  was  more  dictatorial  and  obstinate  than 
Clay  was  at  this  juncture.  Clay  was  the  champion 
of  the  system  of  state-craft  which  makes  public 
men  undertake  a  tutelage  of  the  nation,  and  teaches 
them  not  to  be  content  to  let  the  nation  grow  by 
its  own  forces,  and  according  to  the  shaping  of  the 
forces  and  the  conditions.  His  system  of  states- 
manship is  one  which  always  offers  shelter  to  num- 
bers of  interested  schemes  and  corrupt  enterprises. 
The  public  regarded  the  Bank,  under  his  political 
advocacy,  as  a  part  of  that  system  of  state-craft. 

The  national  Republican  convention  met  at 
Baltimore,  December  12,  1831.  It  consisted  2  of 
155  delegates  from  seventeen  States.  Abner  La- 
cock,  of  Pennsylvania,  who  as  senator  had  made 
a  very  strong  report  against  Jackson  on  the  Semi- 
nole  war,  was  president  of  the  convention.  John 
Sergeant,  of  Pennsylvania,  was  nominated  for  Vice- 
President.  The  convention  issued  an  address,  in 
which  the  Bank  question  was  put  forward.  It  was 
declared  that  the  President  "  is  fully  and  three 
times  over  pledged  to  the  people  to  negative  any 
bill  that  may  be  passed  for  rechartering  the  Bank, 
and  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  additional  influ- 
ence which  he  would  acquire  by  a  reelection  would 
i  Ingersoll,  268.  2  41  Niles,  301. 


PETITION  FOR  RECHARTER  299 

be  employed  to  carry  through  Congress  the  ex- 
traordinary substitute  which  he  has  repeatedly 
proposed."  The  appeal,  therefore,  was  to  defeat 
Jackson  in  order  to  save  the  Bank  and  to  prevent 
the  device  proposed  by  Jackson  from  being  tried. 

Such  a  challenge  as  that  could  have  but  one 
effect  on  Jackson.  It  called  every  faculty  he  pos- 
sessed into  activity  to  compass  the  destruction  of 
the  Bank.  Instead  of  retiring  from  the  position 
he  had  taken,  the  moment  there  was  a  fight  to  be 
fought,  he  did  what  he  had  done  at  New  Orleans. 
He  moved  his  lines  up  to  the  last  point  he  could 
command  on  the  side  towards  the  enemy.  The 
anti-Bank  men,  Kendall,  Blair,  and  Hill,  must  have 
been  delighted  to  see  the  adversary  put  spurs  into 
Jackson's  animosity.  The  proceedings  seemed  to 
prove  just  what  the  anti-Bank  men  had  asserted : 
that  the  Bank  was  a  great  monster,  which  aimed 
to  control  elections,  and  to  set  up  and  put  down 
Presidents.  The  campaign  of  1832  was  a  struggle 
between  the  popularity  of  the  Bank  and  the  popu- 
larity of  Jackson.  His  popularity  in  rural  Penn- 
sylvania had  never  had  any  rational  basis,  and 
hence  could  not  be  overthrown  by  rational  deduc- 
tions. His  spirit  and  boldness  in  meeting  the  issue 
offered  by  Clay  won  him  support.  His  party  was 
not  broken ;  it  was  consolidated.  The  opposition 
to  him  was  divided,  discordant,  uncertain  of  itself, 
vague  in  its  principle,  and  hesitating  as  to  its  pro- 
gramme. The  Bank  could  never  be  a  strong  pop- 
ular interest,  nor  the  maintenance  of  it  a  positive 


300  ANDREW  JACKSON 

purpose  which  could  avail  to  consolidate  a  party. 
Opposition  to  secret  societies  was  a  whim  which 
never  could  inspire  a  party  ;  it  could  only  avail  to 
put  the  kind  of  people  who  take  up  whims  in  the 
attitude  of  stubborn  opposition,  which  makes  it  im- 
practicable to  cooperate  with  them  in  organization. 
On  the  9th  of  January,  1832,  in  prosecution  of 
the  programme,  the  memorial  of  the  Bank  for  a 
renewal  of  its  charter  was  presented  in  the  Senate 
by  Dallas,  and  in  the  House  by  McDuffie.  These 
men  were  both  "  Bank  democrats."  This  name  is 
ambiguous,  unless  we  distinguish  between  Bank 
democrats  and  bank  democrats,  for  the  latter  name 
began  to  be  given  to  those  who  were  interested  in 
local  banks  and  who  went  over  to  Jackson  when 
he  attacked  their  great  rival.  Sargent 1  says  Bid- 
die  told  him  that  the  Bank  wanted  Webster,  or 
some  such  unequivocal  friend  of  the  Bank,  to  pre- 
sent the  memorial,  but  that  Dallas  claimed  the  duty 
as  belonging  to  a  Pennsylvanian.  There  was  great 
and  just  dissatisfaction  with  Dallas  for  the  way  in 
which  he  managed  the  business.  He  intimated  a 
doubt  whether  the  application  was  not  premature, 
and  a  doubt  about  the  policy  of  the  memorial,  lest 
"  it  might  be  drawn  into  a  real  or  imaginary  con- 
flict with  some  higher,  some  more  favorite,  some 
more  immediate  wish  or  purpose  of  the  American 
people."  In  the  Senate  the  petition  was  referred 
to  a  select  committee,  and  in  the  House  to  the 
Committee  on  Ways  and  Means.  The  Senate 

1  1  Sargent,  215. 


PETITION  FOR  RECHARTER  301 

committee  reported  favorably,  March  13th,  and 
recommended  only  a  few  changes  in  the  old  char- 
ter. They  proposed  to  demand  a  bonus  of  one  and 
a  half  millions  in  three  annual  instalments.  In 
the  House,  McDuffie  reported  February  9th.1  He 
said  that  the  proposition  to  recharter  had  called  out 
a  number  of  wild  propositions.  The  old  Bank  was 
too  large,  yet  now  one  was  proposed  with  a  capital 
of  fifty  millions.  He  criticised  the  notion  that  all 
citizens  should  have  an  equal  right  to  subscribe  to 
the  stock  of  the  Bank.  If  A  has  $100  on  balance, 
and  B  owes  $100  on  balance,  their  "equal  right" 
to  subscribe  to  bank  stock  is  a  strange  thing  to 
discuss. 

Benton  2  says  that  the  opponents  of  the  Bank  in 
Congress  agreed  upon  a  policy.  They  determined 
to  fight  the  charter  at  every  point,  and  to  bring 
the  Bank  into  odium  as  much  as  possible.  He 
says  that  he  organized  a  movement  to  this  effect  in 
the  House,  incited  Clayton,  of  Georgia,  to  demand 
an  investigation  of  the  Bank,  and  furnished  him 
with  the  charges  and  specifications  on  which  to 
base  that  demand.  Clayton  moved  for  an  investi- 
gation, February  23d.  He  presented  Ben  ton's 
charges,  seven  important  and  fifteen  minor  ones. 
McDuffie  answered  the  charges  at  once,  but  the 
investigation  was  ordered  to  be  made  by  a  special 
committee.  They  reported,  April  30th.  The  ma- 
jority reported  that  the  Bank  ought  not  to  be 
rechartered  until  the  debt  was  all  paid  and  the 

1  Document  C.  2  1  Benton,  236. 


302  ANDREW   JACKSON 

revenue  readjusted.  R.  M.  Johnson  signed  this 
report,  so  as  to  make  a  majority,  out  of  good- 
nature. He  rose  in  his  place  in  Congress  and  said 
that  he  had  not  looked  at  a  document  at  Phila- 
delphia. The  minority  reported  that  the  Bank 
ought  to  be  rechartered;  that  it  was  sound  and 
useful.  John  Quincy  Adams  made  a  third  report, 
in  which  he  brought  his  characteristic  industry  to 
bear  on  the  question,  and  discussed  all  the  points 
raised  in  the  attack  on  the  Bank.  It  is  to  his 
report  that  we  are  indebted  for  a  knowledge  of 
the  correspondence  of  1829  between  Biddle  and 
Ingham,  and  the  controversy  over  the  Portsmouth 
branch,  which  was  the  first  skirmish  in  the  "  Bank 
War."  i 

The  charges  against  the  Bank,  and  the  truth 
about  them,  so  far  as  we  can  discover  it,  were  as 
follows :  — 

(1.)  Usury.  The  bank  sold  Bank  of  Kentucky 
notes  to  certain  persons  on  long  credit.  When 
these  persons  afterwards  claimed  an  allowance  for 
depreciation,  it  was  granted.  A  case  which  came  to 
trial  went  off  on  technicalities,  which  were  claimed 
to  amount  to  a  confession  by  the  Bank  that  it  had 
made  an  unlawful  contract.2  The  Bank  had  also 
charged  discount  and  exchange  for  domestic  bills, 
on  such  a  basis  that  the  two  amounted  to  more  than 
six  per  cent,  the  rate  to  which  it  was  restrained  by 

1  Document  B. 

2  Cf.  Bank  of  the  United  States  vs.  William  Owens  et  d.    2 

527. 


CHARGES   AGAINST  THE  BANK  303 

its  charter.  This  charge  was  no  doubt  true.  The 
device  was  used  by  all  banks  to  evade  the  usury 
law. 

(2.)  Branch  drafts  issued  as  currency.  The 
amount  of  these  outstanding  was  $7,400,000.  The 
majority  of  the  committee  doubted  the  lawfulness 
of  the  branch  drafts,  but  said  nothing  about 
the  danger  from  them  as  instruments  of  credit. 
Adams  said  that  they  were  useful,  but  likely  to 
do  mischief.  These  drafts  were  in  form  redeem- 
able where  issued,  but  in  intention  and  practice 
they  were  redeemed  hundreds  of  miles  away,  and 
they  had  no  true  convertibility.  There  was  no 
check  whatever  on  the  inflation  of  the  currency 
by  them  so  long  as  credit  was  active.  Cambre- 
leng  very  pointedly  asked  Biddle  how  the  branch 
draft  arrangement  differed  from  an  obligation  of  a 
Philadelphia  bank  to  'redeem  all  the  notes  of  all 
the  banks  in  Pennsylvania.  Biddle  replied  that 
the  Bank  of  the  United  States  controlled  all  the 
branches  which  issued  branch  drafts  on  it.  That 
was,  to  be  sure,  the  assumption,  but  he  had  had 
hard  experience  all  winter  that  it  was  not  true  in 
fact.1 

(3.)  Sales  of  coin,  especially  American  coin. 
The  Bank  had  bought  and  sold  foreign  coin  by 
weight,  and  had  sold  $84,734.44  of  American  gold 
coin.  The  majority  held  that  such  coins  were  not 
bullion,  because  Congress  had  fixed  their  value  by 
law.  Adams  easily  showed  the  fallacy  of  this.  AU 

1  See  below,  pages  311-12. 


304  ANDREW  JACKSON 

gold  coins,  then,  American  included,  were  a  com- 
modity, not  money.1 . 

(4.)  Sales  of  public  stocks.  The  Bank  was  for- 
bidden by  the  charter  to  sell  public  stocks,  the 
object  being  to  prevent  it  from  manipulating  the 
price  of  the  same.  In  1824,  in  aid  of  a  refunding 
scheme,  the  Bank  took  some  public  stocks  from 
the  government,  and  had  special  permission  by  act 
of  Congress  to  sell  them.  Nevertheless,  the  ma- 
jority disapproved  of  the  sale. 

(5.)  Gifts  to  roads,  canals,  etc.  The  Bank  had 
made  two  subscriptions  of  $1,500  each  to  the  stock 
of  turnpike  companies.  The  other  cases  were  all 
petty  gifts  to  fire  companies,  etc.  The  majority 
argued  that,  since  the  administration  had  pro- 
nounced against  internal  improvements,  the  Bank 
ought  not  to  have  assisted  any  such  works.  Adams 
said  that  the  administration  had  opposed  internal 
improvements,  on  the  ground  that  they  were  uncon- 
stitutional when  undertaken  by  the  federal  govern- 
ment ;  but  he  asked  what  argument  that  furnished 
against  such  works  when  undertaken  by  anybody 
else. 

(6.)  Building  houses  to  let  or  sell.  The  Bank 
had  been  obliged,  in  some  cases,  to  take  real  estate 
for  debts.  When  it  could  not  sell,  it  had,  in  a 
few  cases,  improved. 

These  points  were  the  alleged  violations  of  the 
charter.  Biddle  denied  the  seventh  charge,  of  non- 
user,  in  failing  to  issue  notes  in  the  South  and 
1  See  page  390. 


CHARGES  AGAINST  THE  BANK  305 

West  for  seven  years.  Adams  pointed  out  that 
these  charges  would  only  afford  ground  for  a  scire 
facias  to  go  before  a  jury  on  the  facts. 

The  charges  of  mismanagement,  and  the  truth 
about  them,  so  far  as  we  can  ascertain,  were  as 
follows :  — 

(1.)  Subsidizing  the  press.  Webb  and  Noah, 
of  the  "  Courier  and  Enquirer "  (administration 
organ  until  April,  1831 ;  then  in  favor  of  the 
Bank),  Gales  and  Seaton,  of  the  "  National  Intel- 
ligencer" (independent  opposition),  Duff  Green, 
of  the  "  Telegraph "  (administration  organ  until 
the  spring  of  1831),  and  Thomas  Ritchie,  of  the 
Richmond  "  Enquirer  "  (administration),  were  on 
the  books  of  the  Bank  as  borrowers.  The  change 
of  front  by  the  "  Courier  and  Enquirer "  was  re- 
garded as  very  significant.  Adams  said  that  there 
was  no  law  against  subsidizing  the  press,  and  that 
the  phrase  meant  nothing.  He  protested  against 
the  examination  of  the  editors.  The  case  stood  so 
that,  if  the  Bank  discounted  a  note  for  an  admin- 
istration editor,  it  was  said  to  bribe  him ;  if  for  an 
opposition  editor,  it  was  said  to  subsidize  him. 

(2.)  Favoritism  to  Thomas  Biddle,  second  cou- 
sin of  the  president  of  the  Bank.  T.  Biddle  was 
the  broker  of  the  Bank.  N.  Biddle  admitted 
that  the  Bank  had  followed  a  usage,  adopted  by 
other  banks,  of  allowing  cash  in  the  drawer  to  be 
loaned  out  to  particular  persons,  and  replaced  by 
securities,  which  were  passed  as  cash,  for  a  few 
days.  He  said  the  practice  had  been  discontinued. 


306  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Reuben  M.  Whitney  made  a  very  circumstantial 
charge  that  T.  Biddle  had  been  allowed  to  do  this, 
and  that  he  had  paid  no  interest  for  the  funds  of 
the  bank  of  which  he  thus  got  the  use.  The  loans 
to  him  were  very  large.  October  15,  1830,  he  had 
$1,131,672  at  five  per  cent.  N.  Biddle  proved  that 
he  was  in  Washington  when  Whitney's  statement 
implied  his  presence  in  Philadelphia.  Adams  said 
that  Whitney  lied.  It  was  certainly  true,  and  was 
admitted,  that  T.  Biddle  had  had  enormous  confi- 
dential transactions  with  the  Bank,  but  Whitney 
was  placed,  in  respect  to  all  the  important  part  of 
his  evidence,  in  the  position  of  a  convicted  calum- 
niator. He  went  to  Washington,  where  he  was 
taken  into  the  kitchen  cabinet  and  made  special 
agent  of  the  deposit  banks.  In  1837  he  published 
an  "Address  to  the  American  People,"  in  which 
he  reiterated  the  charges  against  Biddle.1 

(3.)  Exporting  specie,  and  drawing  specie  from 
the  South  and  West.  The  minority  state  that  the 
usual  current  was,  that  silver  was  imported  from 
Mexico  to  New  Orleans,  and  passed  up  the  Missis- 
sippi and  Ohio,  and  was  exported  to  China  from 
the  East.  From  1820  to  1832,  822,500,000  were 
drawn  from  the  South  and  West  to  New  York. 
The  Bank  was  charged  with  draining  the  West  of 
specie.  So  far  as  the  current  of  silver  was  normal, 
the  Bank  had  nothing  to  do  with  it.  If  there  had 
been  no  banks  of  issue,  the  West  would  have  kept 
enough  specie  for  its  use,  and  the  current  would 
i  52  Niles,  106. 


CHARGES  AGAINST  THE   BANK  307 

have  flowed  through  and  past,  leaving  always 
enough.  The  paper  issues  in  the  valley  drove  out 
the  specie,  and  little  stayed.  The  branch  drafts, 
after  1827,  helped  to  produce  this  result,  and  the 
charge  was,  in  so  far,  just.1  The  Bank  was  also 
charged  with  exporting  specie  as  a  result  of  its 
exchange  operations.  It  sold  drafts  on  London 
for  use  in  China,  payable  six  months  after  sight. 
They  were  sold  for  the  note  of  rfie  buyer  at  one 
year.  The  goods  could  be  imported  and  sold  to 
meet  the  draft.  This  produced  an  inflation  of 
credit,  since  one  who  had  no  capital,  if  he  could 
get  the  bank  accommodation,  could  extend  credit 
indefinitely.  The  majority  made  a  point  on  this, 
but  they  added  the  following  contribution  to  finan- 
cial science  :  "  The  legitimate  object  of  banks  the 
committee  believe  to  be  granting  facilities,  not 
loaning  capital."  On  that  theory  there  would 
have  been  no  fault  to  be  found  with  the  China 
drafts,  which  must  have  been  a  great  "  facility " 
to  those  who  could  get  them,  and  who  had  no  other 
capital. 

(4.)  The  improper  increase  of  branches.  It 
was  true  that  there  were  too  many.  Cheves,  in 
his  time,  thought  some  of  them  disadvantageous  to 
the  Bank ;  but  it  had  been  importuned  to  establish 
them,  and  there  was  complaint  if  a  branch  was 
lacking  where  the  government  or  influential  indi- 

1  Gouge  says  that,  in  1828,  there  was  no  local  bank  in  operation 
in  Kentucky,  Indiana,  Illinois,  or  Missouri,  and  only  one  each  in 
Tennessee,  Mississippi,  and  Alabama.  Gouge,  39. 


308  ANDREW  JACKSON 

viduals  wanted  one.  To  abolish  one  was  not  to 
be  thought  of  at  all.  The  whole  history  of  the 
Bank  proves  the  evil  of  branches,  unless  the  canons 
of  banking  which  are  recognized  are  the  soundest, 
and  the  discipline  the  most  stringent. 

(5.)  Expansion  of  the  circulation  by  $1,300,000 
between  September  1,  1831,  and  April  1,  1832, 
although  the  discounts  had  been  reduced  during 
the  winter.  The  Bank  was  struggling  already 
with  the  branch  drafts,  and  the  facts  alleged  were 
produced  by  its  efforts  to  cope  with  the  effects  of 
the  drafts. 

(6.)  Failure  of  the  Bank  to  serve  the  nation. 
The  majority  made  another  extraordinary  blunder 
here.  They  said  that  the  duties  were  paid  at  New 
York  and  Philadelphia,  and  that  drafts  on  these 
cities  were  always  at  a  premium.  Hence  they 
argued  that  the  Bank  gained  more  the  further  it 
transferred  funds  for  the  government.  The  minor- 
ity ridiculed  this  as  an  annihilation  of  space,  a 
means  of  making  a  thing  worth  more  the  further  it 
was  from  where  it  was  wanted. 

(7.)  Mismanagement  of  the  public  deposits. 
The  majority  state  what  they  think  the  Bank  ought 
to  do.  It  ought  to  use  its  capital  as  a  permanent 
fund,  and  loan  the  public  deposits  on  time,  so  as 
to  be  payable  near  the  time  when  they  would  be 
required  by  the  government  for  the  debt  payments. 
If  the  Bank  had  done  this  it  would  have  carried  to 
a  maximum  the  disturbances  in  the  money  market 
which  were  actually  produced  by  the  semi-annual 


CHARGES  AGAINST  THE   BANK  309 

payments  on  the  debt.  It  would  have  inflated  and 
contracted  its  discounts  by  an  enormous  sum  every 
six  months. 

(8.)  Postponement  of  the  payment  of  the  three 
per  cents.  These  stocks  were  issued  in  1792  for 
the  accrued  interest  on  the  Eevolutionary  debt. 
They  were  to  be  paid  at  par.  The  Secretary  in- 
formed the  Bank,  March  24th,  just  before  the 
Bank  committee  was  raised,  that  he  should  pay 
half  the  three  per  cents  (16,000,000)  in  July. 
Biddle  hastened  to  Washington  to  secure  a  post- 
ponement ;  not,  as  he  affirmed,  for  the  sake  of 
the  Bank,  but  for  two  other  reasons :  (1)  that 
19,000,000  duty  bonds  would  be  payable  July  1st, 
and  the  merchants  would  be  put  to  inconvenience  if 
the  debt  payment  fell  at  that  time ;  (2)  a  visitation 
of  cholera  was  to  be  feared,  which  would  derange 
industry ;  and  the  payment  of  the  debt,  with  the 
recall  of  so  much  capital  loaned  to  merchants, 
would  add  to  the  distress.  The  friends  of  the 
Bank  said  that  these  reasons  were  good  and  suffi- 
cient. Its  enemies  said  that  they  were  specious, 
but  were  only  pretexts.  The  Secretary  agreed  to 
defer  the  payment  of  85,000,000  of  the  three  per 
cents  until  October  1st,  the  Bank  agreeing  to  pay 
the  interest  for  three  months.1  This  matter  will 
be  discussed  below. 

(9.)  Incomplete  number  of  directors.  Biddle 
was  both  government  director  and  elected  director, 
so  that  there  were  only  twenty-four  in  all.  The 

1  Document  D. 


310  ANDREW  JACKSON 

government  directors  might  be  reappointed  indefi- 
nitely. The  elected  ones  rotated.  Biddle  was 
both,  so  that  he  might  always  be  eligible  to  the 
Presidency. 

(10.)  Large  expenditures  for  printing:  16,700 
in  1830 :  $9,100  in  1831.  From  1829,  the  date 
of  Jackson's  first  attack,  the  Bank  spent  money  on 
pamphlets  and  newspapers  to  influence  public 
opinion  in  its  favor. 

(11.)  Large  contingent  expenditures.  There 
was  a  contingent  fund  account,  the  footings  of 
which,  in  1832,  were  16,000,000,  to  sink  the  losses 
of  the  first  few  years,  the  bonus,  premiums  on 
public  stocks  bought,  banking  house,  etc.,  etc. 
The  suggestion  was  that  this  was  a  convenient 
place  in  which  to  hide  corrupt  expenditures,  and 
that  the  sum  was  so  large  as  to  raise  a  suspicion 
that  such  were  included  in  it. 

(12.)  Loans  to  members  of  Congress  in  ad- 
vance of  appropriations.  Adams  objected  to  this 
as  an  evil  practice.  He  said  afterwards  that  the 
investigation  into  this  point  was  dropped,  because 
it  was  found  that  a  large  number  of  congressmen 
of  both  parties  had  had  loans. 

(13.)  Refusal  to  give  a  list  of  stockholders  resi- 
dent in  Connecticut,  so  that  that  State  might  col- 
lect taxes  from  them  on  their  stock. 

(14.)  Usurpation  of  the  control  of  the  Bank  by 
the  exchange  committee  of  the  board  of  directors, 
to  the  exclusion  of  the  other  directors.  This 
charge  was  denied. 


CHARGES  AGAINST  THE  BANK  311 

In  all  this  tedious  catalogue  of  charges  we  can 
find  nothing  but  frivolous  complaints  and  ignorant 
criticism  successfully  refuted,  except  when  we 
touch  the  branch  drafts.  The  majority  of  the 
committee,  if  all  their  points  are  taken  together, 
thought  that  the  Bank  ought  to  lend  the  public 
deposits  liberally,  and  draw  them  in  promptly 
when  wanted  to  pay  the  debt,  yet  ought  to  refuse 
no  accommodation  (especially  to  any  one  who  was 
embarrassed),  ought  not  to  sell  its  public  stocks, 
nor  increase  its  circulation,  nor  draw  in  its  loans, 
nor  part  with  its  specie,  nor  draw  on  the  debtor 
branches  in  the  West,  nor  press  the  debtor  State 
banks,  nor  contract  any  temporary  loans.  The 
student  of  the  evidence  and  reports  of  1832,  if  he 
believes  the  Bank's  statements  in  the  evidence,  will 
say  that  the  Bank  was  triumphantly  vindicated. 
Two  facts,  however,  are  very  striking :  (1)  The 
most  important  of  the  charges  against  which  the 
Bank  successfully  defended  itself  in  1832  were  the 
very  acts  of  which  it  was  guilty  in  1837-38,  and 
they  were  what  ruined  it ;  these  were  the  second 
charge,  which  involved  Whitney's  veracity,  and 
the  fourteenth  charge,  which  the  bank  denied. 
(2)  Whether  the  Bank  was  thoroughly  sincere 
and  above-board  in  these  matters  is  a  question  on 
which  an  unpleasant  doubt  is  thrown  by  the  cer- 
tainty that  it  was  not  thoroughly  honest  in  some 
other  matters.  In  regard  to  the  three  per  cents 
(under  8),  it  is  certain  that  Biddle  wanted  to 
defer  the  payment  for  the  sake  of  the  Bank.  He 


312  ANDREW  JACKSON 

was  embarrassed  already  by  the  debt  of  the  western 
branches,  which  had  been  produced  by  the  opera- 
tion of  the  branch  drafts.  Their  effect  was  just 
beginning  to  tell  seriously.  There  was  a  great 
movement  of  free  capital  in  the  form  of  specie  to 
this  country  in  1830,  on  account  of  revolutions  in 
Europe.  In  1830  and  1831  the  United  States 
paid  its  stock  note  in  the  capital  of  the  Bank. 
Capital  was  easy  to  borrow.  In  October,  1831,  a 
certain  stringency  set  in.  The  branch  drafts  were 
transferring  the  capital  of  the  Bank  to  the  western 
branches,  and  locking  it  up  there  in  accommoda- 
tion paper,  indefinitely  extended  by  drawing  and 
redrawing.  Biddle  could  not  make  the  western 
branches  pay.  He  was  forced  to  curtail  the  east- 
ern branches.  At  such  a  juncture  it  was  impossi- 
ble for  him  to  see  with  equanimity  the  public  bonds 
which  bore  only  three  per  cent  interest  paid  off  at 
par,  when  the  market  rate  for  money  was  seven  or 
eight  per  cent.  He  wanted  to  get  possession  of  that 
capital.  Even  before  he  received  notice  that  the 
three  per  cents  were  to  be  paid,  he  tried  to  nego- 
tiate with  Ludlow,  the  representative  of  a  large 
number  of  holders  of  the  three  per  cents,  for  the 
purchase  of  the  same.  Ludlow  had  not  power  to 
sell.1  Great  consequences  hung  on  the  strait  into 
which  the  branch  drafts  had  pushed  the  Bank,  and 
upon  this  measure  of  relief  to  which  Biddle  had  re- 
course. Biddle  was  too  plausible.  In  any  emergency 
he  was  ready  to  write  a  letter  or  report,  to  smooth 
1  Folk's  Minority  Report,  1833,  Document  E. 


BIDDLE'S  PLAUSIBILITY  313 

things  over,  and  present  a  good  face  in  spite  of 
facts.  Any  one  who  has  carefully  studied  the 
history  of  the  Bank,  and  Biddle's  "statements," 
will  come  to  every  statement  of  his  with  a  disa- 
greeable sense  of  suspicion.  It  is  by  no  means 
certain,  whatever  the  true  explanation  of  the  con- 
tradiction may  be,  that  Whitney  told  a  lie  in 
the  matter  in  which  his  word  and  Biddle's  were 
opposed. 

Biddle's  theory  of  bank-note  issues  was  vicious 
and  false.  He  thought  that  the  business  of  a  bank 
was  to  furnish  a  paper  medium  for  trade  and  com- 
merce. He  thought  that  this  medium  served  as  a 
token  and  record  of  transactions,  so  that  the  trans- 
actions to  be  accomplished  called  out  the  paper, 
and  when  accomplished  brought  the  paper  back. 
The  art  of  the  banker  consisted  in  a  kind  of  leger- 
demain, by  which  he  kept  bolstering  up  one  trans- 
action by  another,  and  swelling  the  total  amount 
of  them  on  which  he  won  profits.  There  could 
then  be  no  inflation  of  the  paper,  if  it  was  only 
put  out  as  demanded  for  real  transactions.  There- 
fore he  never  distinguished  between  bills  of  ex- 
change and  money,  or  the  true  paper  substitute  for 
money,  which  is  constantly  and  directly  interchange- 
able with  money,  so  that  it  cannot  degenerate  into 
a  negotiable  instrument  like  notes  and  bills.  His 
management  of  the  Bank  was  a  test  of  his  theory 
on  a  grand  scale.  The  branch  drafts  were  a  spe- 
cial test  of  it.  It  was  proved  that  they  had  none 
of  the  character  of  convertible  bank-notes  or  money, 


314  ANDREW  JACKSON 

but  were  instruments  of  credit,  and,  like  all  instru- 
ments of  credit  which  have  cut  loose  from  actual 
redemption  in  capital,  there  was  no  more  limit  to 
their  possible  inflation  than  to  the  infinity  of  hu- 
man hopes  and  human  desires.  Only  a  few  months 
after  the  congressional  investigation,  November, 
1832,  the  president  of  the  Nashville  branch  wrote 
to  Biddle :  "  Be  assured,  sir,  that  we  are  as  well 
convinced  as  you  are  that  too  many  bills  are  offered 
and  purchased,  —  amounting  to  more  than  the 
present  crop  of  cotton  and  tobacco  will  pay;  I 
mean,  before  all  these  papers  are  taken  up."  It 
does  not  appear  that,  in  the  spring  of  1832,  Biddle 
yet  perceived  the  operation  of  the  branch  drafts, 
and  it  could  not  be  said  that  sincerity  required  that 
he  should  avow  a  mistake  to  a  hostile  committee ; 
but  his  letter  to  Clayton,  appended  to  the  report 
of  1832,  is  meretricious  and  dazzling,  calculated  to 
repel  investigation  and  cover  up  weakness  by  a 
sensational  assertion.  "  The  whole  policy  of  the 
Bank  for  the  last  six  months  has  been  exclusively 
protective  and  conservative,  calculated  to  mitigate 
suffering  and  yet  avert  danger."  He  sketches  out 
in  broad  and  bold  outlines  the  national  and  inter- 
national relations  of  American  industry  and  com- 
merce and  the  financial  relations  of  the  Treasury, 
with  the  Bank  enthroned  over  all  as  the  financial 
providence  of  the  country.  This  kind  of  writing 
had  a  great  effect  on  the  uninitiated.  Who  could 
dispute  with  a  man  who  thus  handled  all  the  pub- 
lic and  private  finance  of  the  whole  country  as  a 


BIDDLE'S  INSINCERITY        .  315 

school-master  would  tell  boys  how  to  do  a  sum  in 
long  division  ?  However,  it  was  all  humbug,  and 
especially  that  part  which  represented  the  Bank 
as  watching  over  and  caring  for  the  public.  As 
Gouge  most  justly  remarked,  after  quoting  some 
of  Biddle's  rhetoric  :  "  The  true  basis  of  the  in- 
terior trade  of  the  United  States  is  the  fertility  of 
the  soil  and  the  industry  of  the  people.  The  sun 
would  shine,  the  streams  would  flow,  and  the  earth 
would  yield  her  increase,  if  the  Bank  of  the  United 
States  was  not  in  existence." l  If  the  Bank  had 
been  strong,  Biddle's  explanations  would  all  have 
been  meretricious ;  as  it  was,  the  Bank  had  been 
quite  fully  occupied  in  1831-32  in  taking  care  of 
itself,  mitigating  its  own  sufferings  and  averting 
its  own  dangers. 

No  doubt  the  Bank  was  the  chief  sufferer  from 
the  shocks  inflicted  on  the  money  market  by  the 
sudden  and  heavy  payments  on  the  public  debt. 
Long  credits  were  given  for  duties.  When  paid 
they  passed  into  the  Bank  as  public  deposits. 
They  were  loaned  again  to  merchants  to  pay  new 
duties,  so  that  one  credit  was  piled  upon  another 
already  in  this  part  of  the  arrangement.  Then 
the  deposits  were  called  in  to  meet  drafts  of  the 
Treasury  to  pay  the  debt,  and  so  passed  to  the 
former  fund-holders.  These  latter  next  entered 
the  money  market  as  investors,  and  the  capital 
passed  into  new  employments.  Therefore  Ben- 
ton's  argument,  which  all  the  anti-Bank  men  caught 
1  Gouge,  56. 


316  ANDREW  JACKSON 

up,  that  the  financial  heats  and  chills  of  this  period 
were  certainly  due  to  the  malice  of  the  Bank,  is  of 
no  force  at  all.  The  disturbances  were  such,  they 
necessarily  lasted  so  long,  and  they  finally  settled 
down  to  such  uncalculable  final  effects  that  all  such 
deductions  as  Ben  ton  made  were  unwarranted.  A 
public  debt  is  not  a  blessing,  but  it  is  not  as  great 
a  curse  as  a  public  surplus,  and  it  is  very  possible 
to  pay  off  a  debt  too  rapidly.  We  shall,  on  two 
or  three  further  occasions  in  this  history,  find  the 
"  public  deposits  "  banging  about  the  money  market 
like  a  cannon  ball  loose  in  the  hold  of  a  ship  in  a 
high  wind. 

While  the  committee  was  investigating  the  Bank 
the  political  strife  was  growing  more  intense,  and 
every  chance  of  dealing  dispassionately  with  the 
question  of  recharter  had  passed  away.  In  Janu- 
ary, Van  Buren's  nomination  as  minister  to  Eng- 
land was  rejected  by  the  Senate.1  The  Legislature 
of  New  York  had  passed  resolutions  against  the 
recharter  of  the  Bank.2  This  hurt  Van  Buren  in 
Pennsylvania.  Such  was  the  strange  combination 
of  feelings  and  convictions  at  this  time  that  Jack- 
son could  demolish  the  Bank  without  shaking  his 
hold  on  Pennsylvania,  but  Van  Buren  was  never 
forgiven  for  the  action  of  his  State  against  the 
Bank.  It  illustrated  again  the  observation  made 
above,  that  the  popular  idol  enjoys  an  unreason- 
able immunity,  while  others  may  be  held  to  an  un- 
reasonable responsibility.  All  Jackson's  intensest 
1  See  page  210.  2  2  Hammond,  351. 


DEMOCRATIC   CONVENTION  —  1832         317 

personal  feeelings,  as  well  as  the  choice  of  the 
kitchen  cabinet,  now  converged  on  Van  Buren's 
nomination.  The  Seminole  war  grudge,  hatred  of 
Calhoun,  the  Eaton  scandal,  and  animosity  to  the 
Synate  contributed  towards  this  end. 

Parton  gives  us  one  of  Lewis's  letters,  which 
shows  the  wire-pulling  which  preceded  the  first 
democratic  convention.  Kendall  was  in  New 
Hampshire  in  the  spring  of  1831.  Lewis  wrote 
to  him  to  propose  that  a  convention  should  be  held 
in  May,  1832,  to  nominate  Van  Buren  for  Vice- 
President.  He  suggested  that  the  New  Hampshire 
Legislature  should  be  prompted  to  propose  it. 
Kendall  arranged  this  and  wrote  a  letter,  giving 
an  account  of  the  meeting,  resolutions,  etc.,  which 
was  published  anonymously  in  the  "  Globe,"  July 
6,  1831.  The  "Globe"  took  up  the  proposition 
and  approved  of  it.  The  convention  met  at  Balti- 
more, May  21,  1832.  John  H.  Eaton  was  a  dele- 
gate to  the  convention.  He  intended  to  vote  against 
Van  Buren,  for,  although  Van  Buren  had  taken 
Mrs.  Eaton's  part,  he  had  not  won  Eaton's  affec- 
tion. Lewis  wrote  to  Eaton  that  he  must  not  vote 
against  Van  Buren  "  unless  he  was  prepared  to 
quarrel  with  the  general."  Van  Buren  was  nomi- 
nated by  260  votes  out  of  326.  The  "  spontaneous 
unanimity  "  of  this  convention  was  produced  by  the 
will  of  Andrew  Jackson  and  the  energetic  discipline 
of  the  kitchen  cabinet.  It  may  well  be  doubted 
whether,  without  Jackson's  support,  Van  Buren 
could  have  got  260  votes  for  President  or  Vice- 


318  ANDREW  JACKSON 

President  in  the  whole  United  States,  in  1832. 
The  "  Globe  "  dragooned  the  whole  Jackson  party 
into  the  support  of  Van  Buren,  not  without  con- 
siderable trouble.  The  convention  adopted  an  ad- 
dress prepared  by  Kendall,  containing  a  review  of 
Jackson's  first  administration.1 

May  7,  1832,  a  national  republican  convention 
of  young  men  met  in  Washington.  William  Cost 
Johnson  was  president.  The  convention  ratified 
the  nominations  of  Clay  and  Sergeant,  and  passed 
a  series  of  resolutions  in  favor  of  tariff  and  internal 
improvements,  and  approving  the  rejection  of  Van 
Buren' s  nomination  as  minister  to  England.2 

During  the  spring  and  summer  Biddle  took 
quarters  in  Washington,  from  which  he  directed 
the  congressional  campaign  on  behalf  of  the  re- 
charter.  He  was  then  at  the  zenith  of  his  power 
and  fame,  and  enjoyed  real  renown  in  Europe  and 
America.  He  and  Jackson  were  pitted  against 
each  other  personally.  Biddle,  however,  put  a 
letter  in  Livingston's  3  hands,  stating  that  he  would 
accept  any  charter  to  which  Jackson  would  con- 
sent.4 Jackson  never  fought  for  compromises,  and 
nothing  was  heard  of  this  letter.  Jackson  drew 
up  a  queer  plan  of  a  "  bank,"  which  he  thought 
constitutional  and  suitable,  but  it  remained  in  his 

1  Kendall's  Autobiography,  296.  2  42  Niles,  206,  236. 

8  Livingston  was  on  the  side  of  the  Bank.  Hunt's  Livingston, 
253. 

4  Ingersoll,  268.  On  the  same  page  it  is  said  that  Biddle  was 
talked  of  for  President  of  the  United  States. 


VETO  OF  THE  BANK  319 

drawer.1    The  anti-Bank  men  affirmed  that  Biddle 
was  corrupting  Congress. 

The  charter  passed  the  Senate  June  llth,  28  to 
20,  and  the  House,  July  3d,  107  to  85.  It  was  sent 
to  the  President  July  4th.  The  Senate  voted  to 
adjourn  July  16th.  It  was  a  clever  device  of  theirs 
to  force  Jackson  to  sign  or  veto  by  giving  him  more 
than  ten  days.  They  wanted  to  force  him  to  a 
direct  issue.  It  is  not  probable  that  there  was 
room  for  his  will  to  be  any  further  stimulated  by 
this  kind  of  manoauvring,  but  he  never  flinched 
from  a  direct  issue,  and  the  only  effect  was  to  put 
him  where  he  would  have  risked  his  reelection  and 
everything  else  on  a  defiant  reply  to  the  challenge 
offered.  Niles  says  2  that,  a  week  before  the  bill 
passed,  the  best  informed  were  "  as  six  to  half  a 
dozen,"  whether  the  bill,  if  passed,  would  be  vetoed, 
but  that,  for  the  two  or  three  days  before  the  bill 
was  sent  up,  a  veto  was  confidently  expected.  The 
veto  was  sent  in,  July  10th.3  The  reasons  given 
for  it  were  :  (1)  The  Bank  would  have  a  monopoly 
for  which  the  bonus  was  no  equivalent.  (2)  One 
fifth  of  the  stockholders  were  foreigners.  (3) 
Banks  were  to  be  allowed  to  pay  the  Bank  of  the 
United  States  in  branch  drafts,  which  individuals 
could  not  do.  (4)  The  States  were  allowed  to  tax 
the  stock  of  the  Bank  owned  by  their  citizens,  which 
would  cause  the  stock  to  go  out  of  the  country. 

1  Ingersoll,  283.  2  42  Niles,  337. 

3  Congress  has  chartered  national  banks  as  follows  :  1791, 1815 
(vetoed),  1816,  1832  (vetoed),  1841,  two  bills,  both  vetoed,  1863. 


320  ANDREW  JACKSON 

(5)  The  few  stockholders  here  would  then  control 
it.  (6)  The  charter  was  unconstitutional.  (7) 
The  business  of  the  Bank  would  be  exempt  from 
taxation.  (8)  There  were  strong  suspicions  of 
mismanagement  in  the  Bank.  (9)  The  President 
could  have  given  a  better  plan.  (10)  The  Bank 
would  increase  the  distinction  between  rich  and 
poor. 

The  bill  was  voted  upon  again  in  the  Senate  July 
13th,  yeas  22,  nays  19.  The  veto  therefore  re- 
mained in  force ;  and  if  the  Bank  was  to  continue  to 
exist  Jackson  must  be  defeated.  The  local  bank 
interest,  however,  had  now  been  aroused  to  the  great 
gain  it  would  make  if  the  Bank  of  the  United  States 
should  be  oyerthrown.  The  Jackson  party  thereby 
won  the  adhesion  of  an  important  faction.  The 
safety-fund  banks  of  New  York  were  bound  into  a 
solid  phalanx  by  their  system,  and  they  constituted 
a  great  political  power.  The  chief  crime  alleged 
against  the  Bank  of  the  United  States  was  med- 
dling with  politics.  The  safety-fund  banks  of  New 
York  were  an  active  political  power  organized 
under  Van  Buren's  control,  and  they  went  into  this 
election  animated  by  the  hope  of  a  share  in  the 
deposits.  The  great  Bank  also  distributed  pam- 
phlets and  subsidized  newspapers,  fighting  for  its 
existence.  The  Jackson  men  always  denounced  this 
action  of  the  Bank  of  the  United  States  as  corrupt, 
and  as  proof  of  the  truth  of  Jackson's  charges. 

Jackson  got  219  electoral  votes;  Clay,  49; 
Floyd,  11,  from  South  Carolina,  the  nullification 


VOTE  IN   1832  321 

ticket ;  Wirt,  7,  from  Vermont.  There  were  two 
vacancies  —  in  Maryland.  Clay  carried  Massa- 
chusetts, Ehode  Island,  Connecticut,  Delaware, 
and  Kentucky,  and  five  votes  in  Maryland.  For 
Vice-President  Van  Buren  got  189.  Pennsylvania 
would  not  vote  for  him.  She  gave  her  30  votes  to 
William  Wilkins.  Sergeant  got  49  votes ;  Henry 
Lee,  of  Massachusetts,  11,  from  South  Carolina ; 
Ellmaker,  7.  At  this  election  South  Carolina  alone 
threw  her  vote  by  her  Legislature.  The  popular 
vote  was  707,217  for  Jackson ;  328,561  for  Clay  ; 
254,720  for  Wirt.  Jackson's  majority,  in  a  total 
™te  (excluding  South  Carolina)  of  1,290,498,  was 
123,936.  In  Alabama  there  was  no  anti-Jackson 
ticket. 


CHAPTER  X 

TARIFF,  NULLIFICATION,  AND  THE  BANK  DURING 
JACKSON'S  SECOND  ADMINISTRATION 

GENERAL  JACKSON  now  advanced  to  another 
development  of  his  political  philosophy  and  his 
political  art.  No  government  which  has  felt  itself 
strong  has  ever  had  the  self-control  to  practise 
faithfully  the  non-interference  theory.  A  popular 
idol  at  the  head  of  a  democratic  republic  is  one 
of  the  last  political  organs  to  do  so.  The  belief  in 
himself  is  of  course  for  him  a  natural  product  of 
the  situation,  and  he  is  quite  ready  to  believe,  as 
he  is  constantly  told,  that  he  can  make  the  people 
happy,  and  can  "save  the  country"  from  evil 
and  designing  persons,  namely,  those  who  do  not 
join  the  chorus  of  adulation.  A  President  of  the 
United  States,  under  existing  social  and  economic 
circumstances,  has  no  chance  whatever  to  play  the 
role  of  Caesar  or  Napoleon,  but  he  may  practise 
the  methods  of  personal  government  within  the 
limits  of  the  situation.  Jackson  held  that  his 
reelection  was  a  triumphant  vindication  of  him  in 
all  the  points  in  which  he  had  been  engaged  in 
controversy  with  anybody,  and  a  kind  of  charter 
to  him,  as  representative,  or  rather  tribune,  of  the 


PERSONAL  GOVERNMENT  323 

people,  to  go  on  and  govern  on  his  own  judgment 
over  and  against  everybody,  including  Congress. 
His  action  about  the  Cherokee  Indians,  his  attitude 
towards  the  Supreme  Court,  his  construction  of  his 
duties  under  the  Constitution,  his  vetoes  of  inter- 
nal improvements  and  the  Bank,  his  defence  of 
Mrs.  Eaton,  his  relations  with  Calhoun  and  Clay, 
his  discontent  with  the  Senate,  all  things,  great 
and  small,  in  which  he  had  been  active  and  inter- 
ested, were  held  to  be  covered  and  passed  upon  by 
the  voice  of  the  people  in  his  reelection.1  Adula- 
tion and  success  had  already  done  much  to  make 
Jackson  a  dangerous  man.  After  his  reelection, 
his  self-confidence  and  self-will  became  tenfold 
greater.2  Moreover,  his  intimates  and  confiden- 
tial advisers,  Kendall,  Lewis,  Blair,  and  Hill,  won 
more  confidence  in  themselves,  and  handled  their 

1  We  may  test  this  theory  in  regard  to  one  point,  the  Bank. 
The  Legislature  of  Pennsylvania,  on  the  2d  of  February,  1832, 
within  eight  months  of  the  election  at  which  Jackson  got  three 
fifths  of   the  vote  of   Pennsylvania,  instructed  the  senators  and 
representatives  in  Congress  from  that  State,  by  a  unanimous  vote 
in  the  Senate,  and  by  77  to  7  in  the  House,  to  secure  the  re- 
charter  of  the  Bank. 

2  "The   truth  is,  I  consider  the  President  intoxicated  with 
power  and  flattery."     "  All  the  circumstances  around  him  [when 
he  came  to  office]   were  calculated   to  make  him  entertain  an 
exalted  opinion  of   himself,  and  a  contemptuous  one  of  others. 
His  own  natural   passions  contributed  to  this  result."      Duane, 
133,  under  date  October,    1833.     "  There  is  a  tone  of  insolence 
and  insult  in  his  intercourse  with  both  Houses  of  Congress,  espe- 
cially since  his  reelection,  which  never  was  witnessed  between  the 
Executive  and  the  Legislature  before."     9  Adams,  Diary,  51 ;  De- 
cember 12,  1833. 


324  ANDREW  JACKSON 

power  with  greater  freedom  and  certainty.]  "  I 
do  not  believe  that  the  world  ever  saw  a  more 
perfectly  unprincipled  set  of  men  than  that  which 
surrounded  Jackson  at  Washington."  *  It  has 
already  been  shown  in  this  history  that  they  were 
perfect  masters  of  the  art  of  party  organization, 
and  that  they  had  a  strong  hatred  of  the  Bank ; 
but  they  had  no  statesmanlike  ideas  in  finance  or 
public  policy,  and  they  governed  by  playing  on 
the  prejudices  and  vanity  of  Jackson. 

Jackson's  modes  of  action  in  his  second  term 
were  those  of  personal  government.  He  proceeded 
avowedly,  on  his  own  initiative  and  responsibility, 
to  experiment,  as  Napoleon  did,  with  great  public 
institutions  and  interests.  It  came  in  his  way  to 
do  some  good,  to  check  some  bad  tendencies  and 
to  strengthen  some  good  ones ;  but  the  moment  the 
historian  tries  to  analyze  these  acts,  and  to  bring 
them,  for  purposes  of  generalization,  into  relations 
with  the  stand-point  or  doctrine  by  which  Jackson 
acted,  that  moment  he  perceives  that  Jackson  acted 
from  spite,  pique,  instinct,  prejudice,  or  emotion, 
and  the  influence  he  exerted  sinks  to  the  nature  of 
an  incident  or  an  accident.  Then,  although  we 
believe  in  personal  liberty  with  responsibility,  and 
in  free  institutions ;  although  we  believe  that  no 
modern  free  state  can  exist  without  wide  popular 
rights ;  although  we  believe  in  the  non-interference 
theory,  and  oppose  the  extension  of  state  action  to 
internal  improvements  and  tariffs;  although  we 

i  John  Tyler,  in  1856.    2  Tyler's  Tylers,  414. 


PERSONAL  GOVERNMENT  325 

recognize  the  dreadful  evils  of  bad  banking  and 
fluctuating  currency ;  and  although  we  believe  that 
the  Union  is  absolutely  the  first  political  interest 
of  the  American  people,  yet,  if  we  think  that  in- 
telligent deliberation  and  disciplined  reason  ought 
to  control  the  civil  affairs  of  a  civilized  state, 
we  must  say  of  Jackson  that  he  stumbled  along 
through  a  magnificent  career,  now  and  then  taking 
up  a  chance  without  really  appreciating  it,  and  leav- 
ing behind  him  distorted  and  discordant  elements 
of  good  and  ill,  just  fit  to  produce  turmoil  and  dis- 
aster in  the  future.  We  have  already  seen,  in 
some  cases,  what  was  the  tyranny  of  his  popularity. 
It  crushed  out  reason  and  common  sense.  To  the 
gravest  arguments  and  remonstrances,  the  answer 
was,  literally,  "  Hurrah  for  Jackson  I  "  Is,  then, 
that  a  sound  state  of  things  for  any  civilized  state  ? 
Is  that  the  sense  of  democracy  ?  Is  a  democratic 
republic  working  fairly  and  truly  by  its  theory  in 
such  a  case?  Representative  institutions  are  de- 
graded on  the  Jacksonian  theory,  just  as  they  are 
on  the  divine-right  theory,  or  on  the  theory  of  the 
democratic  empire. 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  modes  of  personal 
rule  employed  by  Jackson  was  the  perfection  and 
refinement  given  to  the  "  organ  "  as  an  institution 
of  democratic  government.  In  the  hands  of  Blair 
the  "  Globe  "  came  to  be  a  terrible  power.  Every 
office-holder  signed  his  allegiance  by  taking  the 
"  Globe."  In  it  both  friend  and  foe  found  daily 
utterances  from  the  White  House  a  propos  of 


326  ANDREW  JACKSON 

every  topic  of  political  interest.  The  suggestions, 
innuendoes,  queries,  quips,  and  sarcasms  of  the 
"  Globe  "  were  scanned  by  the  men  who  desired  to 
recommend  themselves  by  the  zeal  which  antici- 
pates a  command,  and  the  subserviency  which 
can  even  dispense  with  it.  The  editorials  scarcely 
veiled  their  inspiration  and  authorization.  The 
President  issued  a  message  to  his  party  every  day. 
He  told  the  political  news  confidentially,  and  in 
advance  of  the  mere  newspapers,  while  deriding 
and  denouncing  his  enemies,  praising  the  adherents 
who  pleased  him,  and  checking,  warning,  or  stimu- 
lating all,  as  he  thought  best  to  promote  discipline 
and  efficiency.  When  we  say  "  he "  did  it,  we 
speak,  of  course,  figuratively.  If  it  was  Blair's 
voice,  Jackson  ratified  it.  If  it  was  Jackson's 
will,  Blair  promulgated  it.  We  have  an  instance, 
in  a  letter  of  Jackson  to  Lewis,  August  9,  1832, 
from  Tennessee:  — 

"  With  my  sincere  respects  to  Kendall  &  Blair,  tell 
them  the  veto  works  well,  &  that  the  Globe  revolves  with 
all  its  usual  splendor  —  That  instead,  as  was  predicted 
&  expected  by  my  enemies,  &  some  of  my  friends,  that 
the  veto  would  destroy  me,  it  has  destroyed  the  Bank. 

"  I  have  just  read  the  address  of  the  nulifying  mem- 
bers of  S°.  Carolina  to  their  constituents —  I  hope 
Kendall,  or  Blair  will  criticize  it  well ;  it  is  one  of  the 
most  jesuistical  and  uncandid  productions  I  ever  read, 
and  is  easily  exposed." 

The  South  Carolinians  thought   that   the  limit 
i  Ford  MSS. 


NULLIFICATION  CONVENTION  327 

of  proper  delay  and  constitutional  agitation  had 
been  reached  when  the  tariff  of  July,  1832,  was 
passed.  In  the  year  1832  the  nullifiers,  for  the 
first  time,  got  control  of  South  Carolina.  The 
Legislature  was  convened,  by  special  proclamation, 
for  the  22d  of  October,  1832,  — a  month  earlier 
than  usual.  An  act  was  passed,  October  25th, 
ordering  a  convention  to  be  held  on  the  19th  of 
November.  The  Legislature  then  adjourned  until 
its  regular  day  of  meeting,  the  fourth  Monday  in 
November.  The  convention  met  as  ordered ;  Gov- 
ernor Hamilton  was  president  of  it.  It  adopted 
an  ordinance  that  the  acts  of  Congress  of  May  19, 
1828,  and  July  14,  1832,  were  null  and  void  in 
South  Carolina.  These  proceedings  conformed  to 
a  theory  of  the  practice  of  nullification  which 
the  South  Carolina  doctrinaires  had  wrought  out ; 
namely,  that  the  Legislature  could  not  nullify,  but 
that  a  convention,  being  the  State  in  some  more 
original  capacity,  and  embodying  the  "  sovereignty  " 
in  a  purer  emanation,  could  do  so.  The  theory 
and  practice  of  nullification  was  a  triumph  of 
metaphysical  politics.  The  South  Carolinians  went 
through  the  evolutions,  by  which,  as  they  had 
persuaded  themselves,  nullification  could  be  made 
a  constitutional  remedy,  with  a  solemnity  which 
was  either  edifying  or  ridiculous,  according  as  one 
forgot  or  remembered  that  the  adverse  party  at- 
tached no  significance  to  the  evolutions. 

The  ordinance  provided  that  no  appeal  from  a 
South  Carolina  court  to  a  federal  court  should  be 


328  ANDREW  JACKSON 

allowed  in  any  case  arising  under  any  of  the  laws 
passed  in  pursuance  of  the  ordinance ;  such  an 
appeal  to  be  a  contempt  of  court.  All  officers  and 
jurors  were  to  take  an  oath  to  the  ordinance. 
South  Carolina  would  secede  if  the  United  States 
should  attempt  to  enforce  anything  contrary  to 
the  ordinance.  November  27th  the  Legislature 
met  again,  and  passed  the  laws  requisite  to  put. 
the  ordinance  in  operation.  Goods  seized  by  the 
custom-house  officers  might  be  replevied.  Militia 
and  volunteers  might  be  called  out.  A  thousand 
stand  of  arms  were  to  be  purchased. 

A  Union  convention  met  at  Columbia  early  in 
December.  It  declared  itself  ready  to  support  the 
federal  government.  It  appeared,  therefore,  that 
there  would  be  civil  war  in  South  Carolina.  The 
Union  men  were  strong  in  Charleston  and  in  the 
Western  counties. 

Jackson  immediately  took  up  the  defiance  which 
South  Carolina  had  offered  to  the  federal  govern- 
ment. He  ordered  General  Scott  to  Charleston, 
and  caused  troops  to  collect  within  convenient 
distance,  although  not  so  as  to  provoke  a  colli- 
sion. He  ordered  two  war  vessels  to  Charleston. 
He  issued,  December  10th,  a  proclamation  to  the 
people  of  South  Carolina.  It  was  written  by 
Livingston,  who,  as  we  have  seen,1  had  taken  up  a 
position  against  nullification  more  than  two  years 
before.  He  represented  the  only  tariff  State  in 
the  South,  —  Louisiana.  It  has  been  asserted  that 

1  See  page  253. 


ANTI-NULLIFICATION  PROCLAMATION    329 

• 

Jackson  did  not  like  the  constitutional  doctrines 
of  the  proclamation,  which  are  Madisonian  federal- 
ist, and  not  such  as  he  had  held,  but  that  he  let 
the  paper  pass  on  account  of  the  lack  of  time  to 
modify  it.1  There  is  nothing  of  the  Jacksonian 
temper  in  the  document.  It  is  strong,  moderate, 
eloquent,  and,  at  last,  even  pathetic.2  It  is  very 
long.  The  following  passage  is  perhaps  the  most 
important  in  it :  "I  consider  the  power  to  annul  a 
law  of  the  United  States,  assumed  by  one  State, 
incompatible  with  the  existence  of  the  Union, 
contradicted  expressly  by  the  letter  of  the  Con- 
stitution, unauthorized  by  its  spirit,  inconsistent 
with  every  principle  on  which  it  was  founded,  and 
destructive  of  the  great  object  for  which  it  was 
formed."  This  proclamation  voiced  the  opinion 
and  feeling  of  the  whole  country,  except  the  nulli- 
fiers  in  South  Carolina  and  a  few  of  their  comrades 
in  other  Southern  States.  The  dignified  tone  of 
the  paper  was  especially  satisfactory.  It  was  the 
right  tone  to  take  to  men  who  had  allowed  their 
passionate  temper  to  commit  them  to  unworthy  and 
boyish  proceedings,  and  who  had  sought  a  remedy 
for  civil  grievances  in  acts  which  made  liberty 
and  security  impossible.  Jackson  found  himself 
a  national  civil  hero  for  once,  and  he  enjoyed  the 

1  Lewis  in  3  Parton,  466 ;  Tyler's  Taney,  188.     Taney  recorded, 
in  1861,  that  he  should  have  objected  to  some  of  the  doctrines  of 
the  proclamation,  if  he  had  been  in  Washington  at   the  time. 
Ibid. 

2  Jackson   contributed  a  suggestion  of  the  pathos.      Hunt's 
Livingston,  373. 


330  ANDREW  JACKSON 

plaudits  of  those  persons  who  had  detested  him 
the  most  earnestly.  He  lives  in  popular  memory 
and  tradition  chiefly  as  the  man  who  put  down 
this  treason.  But  the  historian  must  remember 
that,  if  Jackson  had  done  his  duty  in  regard  to 
Georgia  and  the  Indians,  nullification  would  never 
have  attained  any  strength.  The  Southerners  were 
astonished  at  the  proclamation.  It  seemed  to  them 
inconsistent,  even  treacherous.1  The  constitutional 
theories  were  not  at  all  such  as  Jackson  had  been 
understood  to  hold.  They  ascribed  Jackson's  atti- 
tude on  this  question  to  hatred  of  Calhoun.  Old 
John  Randolph,  who  was  in  a  dying  condition, 
roused  himself  as  the  champion  of  State  rights, 
although  he  had  been  a  strong  adherent  of  Jackson, 
and  went  through  the  counties  of  Virginia,  in  which 
he  had  once  been  a  power,  in  his  carriage,  to  try 
to  arouse  the  people  to  resist  the  dangerous  doc- 
trines of  the  proclamation,2  and  yet  to  uphold 
the  Union.  This  southern  dissatisfaction  alarmed 
Jackson's  managers.  Lewis  wrote  to  Ritchie  of 
Richmond,  Sept.  17,  1833  :  — 

"  I  am  very  much  in  hopes  he  [Blair]  will  be  able  to 
convince  you  [Ritchie],  and  other  southern  friends,  that 
the  character  of  the  proclamation  has  been  greatly  mis- 
understood, as  well  as  the  views  of  the  President  with 
regard  to  it."  8 

1  Hodgson,  173.     Cf.  Resolution  of  the  South  Carolina  Legis, 
lature,  43  Niles,  300.     Duff  Green's  Pol.  Beg.  vol.  2,  passim. 

2  2  Garland's  Randolph,  360. 
»  Copy  in  Ford  MSS. 


CALHOUN'S  COURSE  331 

December  20th,  Governor  Hayne  of  South  Car- 
olina issued  a  proclamation  in  answer  to  Jackson's. 
Calhoun  resigned  the  vice-presidency,  December 
28th.  He  was  elected  senator  in  Hayne's  place. 
He  had  been  Vice-President  for  eight  years.  He 
now  returned  to  the  floor  and  to  active  work. 
He  never  afterwards  took  position  in  any  party. 
He  was  an  isolated  man,  who  formed  alliances  to 
further  his  ends.  South  Carolina  also  remained 
an  isolated  State  until  1840,  when  she  voted  for 
Van  Buren  and  came  back  into  the  ranks.  Cal- 
houn seemed  to  have  lost  the  talent  for  practical 
statesmanship  which  he  had  shown  in  his  earlier 
years.  He  involved  himself  tighter  and  tighter  in 
spinnings  of  political  mysticism  and  fantastic  spec- 
ulation. Harriet  Martineau  calls  him  a  cast-iron 
man,  and  describes  his  eager,  absorbed,  over-specu- 
lative type  of  conversation  and  bearing,  even  in 
society.1  "  I  know  of  no  man  who  lives  in  such 
utter  intellectual  solitude.  He  meets  men  and  ha- 
rangues them  by  the  fireside  as  in  the  Senate.  He 
is  wrought  like  a  piece  of  machinery,  set  going  ve- 
hemently  by  a  weight,  and  stops  while  you  answer. 
He  either  passes  by  what  you  say,  or  twists  it  into 
suitability  with  what  is  in  his  head,  and  begins  to 
lecture  again."  He  "  is  as  full  as  ever  of  his  nul- 
lification doctrines  [1836],  and  those  who  know 
the  force  that  is  in  him,  and  his  utter  incapacity  of 
modification  by  other  minds,  .  .  .  will  no  more 
expect  repose  and  self-retention  from  him  than 

1  1  Martineau,  Western  Travel,  148. 


332  ANDREW  JACKSON 

from  a  volcano  in  full  force.  Relaxation  is  no 
longer  in  the  power  of  his  will.  I  never  saw  any 
one  who  so  completely  gave  me  the  idea  of  posses- 
sion." 

In  his  message  of  1832,  Jackson  said  that  the 
protective  system  must  ultimately  be  limited  to 
the  commodities  needed  in  war.  Beyond  this  limit 
that  system  had  already  produced  discontent.  He 
suggested  that  the  subject  should  be  reviewed  in  a 
disposition  to  dispose  of  it  justly.  December  13th 
the  Senate  called  on  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
to  propose  a  tariff  bill.  December  27th,  in  the 
House,  the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means  re- 
ported a  bill  based  on  the  Secretary's  views.  It 
proposed  an  immediate  and  sweeping  reduction, 
with  a  further  reduction,  after  1834,  to  a  "hori- 
zontal "  rate  of  fifteen  per  cent  or  twenty  per  cent. 
January  16,  1833,  Jackson  sent  in  a  message,  in 
which  he  informed  Congress  of  the  proceedings  of 
South  Carolina,  and  asked  for  power  to  remove  the 
custom  house  and  to  hold  goods  for  customs  by  mil- 
itary force ;  also  for  provisions  that  federal  courts 
should  have  exclusive  jurisdiction  of  revenue  cases, 
and  that  the  Circuit  Court  of  the  United  States 
might  remove  revenue  cases  from  State  courts. 
Calhoun,  in  reply  to  this  message,  declared  that 
South  Carolina  was  not  hostile  to  the  Union,  and 
he  made  one  unanswerable  point  against  Jackson's 
position.  Jackson  had  referred  to  the  Supreme 
Court  as  the  proper  authority  to  decide  the  consti- 
tutionality of  the  tariff.  The  nullifiers  had  always 


CONSTITUTIONALITY  OF  PROTECTION    333 

wished  to  get  the  tariff  before  the  Supreme  Court, 
but  there  was  no  way  to  do  so.  The  first  tariff  of 
1789  was  preceded  by  a  preamble,  in  which  the 
protection  of  domestic  manufactures  was  specified 
as  one  of  the  purposes  of  the  act ;  but  this  form 
had  not  been  continued.  The  anti-tariff  men  tried 
to  have  such  a  preamble  prefixed  to  the  tariff  act 
of  1828,  but  the  tariff  majority  voted  it  down. 
Congress  had  unquestioned  power  to  lay  taxes. 
How  could  it  be  ascertained  what  the  purpose  of 
the  majority  in  Congress  was,  when  they  voted  for 
a  certain  tax  law?  How  could  the  constitution- 
ality of  a  law  be  tried,  when  it  turned  on  the  ques- 
tion of  this  purpose,  which,  in  the  nature  of  the 
case,  was  mixed  and  unavowed  ? l  It  was  not, 
therefore,  fair  to  represent  the  nullifiers  as  neglect- 
ing an  obvious  and  adequate  legal  remedy.  A 
grand  debate  on  constitutional  theories  arose  out  of 
Calhoun's  criticism  of  Jackson's  message  and  pro- 
clamation. Calhoun,  Grundy,  and  Clayton  each 
offered  a  set  of  resolutions,2  and  a  flood  of  meta- 
physical dogmatizing  about  constitutional  law  was 
let  loose.  As  it  began  nowhere,  it  ended  nowhere 
In  these  disputes,  the  disputants  always  carefully 
lay  down,  in  their  resolutions  about  "  the  great 
underlying  principles  of  the  Constitution,"  those 
premises  which  will  sustain  the  deductions  which 

1  The  principle  is  covered  fully  by  the  decision  in  Loan  Associ- 
ation vs.  Topeka,  20  Wallace,  655 ;    but  the  practical  difficulty 
probably  remains. 

2  43  Niles,  Supp.  222.    The  debate  is  there  given, 


334  ANDREW  JACKSON 

they  want  to  arrive  at  for  the  support  of  their  in- 
terests. In  the  mean  time  the  merits  of  the  par- 
ticular question  are  untouched.  To  inform  one's 
self  on  the  merits  of  the  question  would  require 
patient  labor.  To  dogmatize  on  "great  prin- 
ciples "  and  settle  the  question  by  an  inference  is 
easy.  Consequently,  the  latter  method  will  not 
soon  be  abandoned. 

On  the  21st  of  January,  1833,  a  bill  for  enfor- 
cing the  collection  of  the  revenue  was  reported  to 
the  Senate.  It  gave  the  powers  and  made  the  pro- 
visions which  Jackson  had  asked  for.  On  the  next 
day  Calhoun  introduced  his  resolutions  :  that  the 
States  are  united  "as  parties  to  a  constitutional 
compact ; "  that  the  acts  of  the  general  govern- 
ment, outside  of  the  defined  powers  given  to  it, 
are  void ;  that  each  State  may  judge  when  the 
compact  is  broken ;  that  the  theory  that  the  people 
of  the  United  States  "  are  now  or  ever  have  been 
united  on  the  principle  of  the  social  compact,  and 
as  such  are  now  formed  into  one  nation  or  people," 
is  erroneous,  false  in  history  and  reason.  It  would 
only  be  tedious  to  cite  the  other  resolutions  offered. 
Webster  was  good  enough  lawyer  to  get  tired  of 
the  metaphysics  very  soon.  Hodgson  says  that  he 
withdrew,  defeated  by  Calhoun.1  The  appearance 
D£  the  "  social  compact "  as  an  understood  and 
accepted  element  of  political  philosophy  is  worth 
noting. 

The  State  Legislatures  also  passed  resolutions, 
1  Hodgson,  174 


COMPROMISE  TARIFF  335 

Massachusetts,  Connecticut,  Delaware,  New  York, 
Missouri,  Tennessee,  and  Indiana  pronounced 
against  nullification ;  North  Carolina  and  Alabama 
against  nullification  and  tariff ;  Georgia  against 
the  tariff,  also  that  nullification  is  unconstitutional, 
and  that  a  convention  of  the  Gulf  States  should 
be  held  ;  New  Hampshire,  that  the  tariff  should 
be  reduced ;  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island,  Ver- 
mont, New  Jersey,  and  Pennsylvania,  that  the 
tariff  ought  not  to  be  reduced.  Virginia  offered 
to  mediate  between  the  United  States  and  South 
Carolina.1 

The  House  was  at  work  on  the  tariff  during 
January.  February  12th,  Clay  introduced  the 
compromise  tariff  in  the  Senate,  to  supersede  all 
other  propositions  and  be  a  final  solution  of  all 
pending  troubles.  Of  all  the  duties  which  were 
over  twenty  per  cent,  by  the  act  of  July  14,  1832, 
one  tenth  of  the  excess  over  twenty  per  cent  was 
to  be  struck  off  after  September  30,  1835,  and  one 
tenth  each  alternate  year  thereafter  until  1841. 
Then  one  half  the  remaining  excess  was  to  be 
taken  off,  and  in  1842  the  tax  would  be  reduced 
to  twenty  per  cent  as  a  horizontal  rate,  with  a 
large  free  list,  home  valuation,  and  no  credit. 
Credit  for  duties  worked  very  mischievously.  An 
importer  sold  his  goods  before  he  paid  his  duties. 
The  price  he  obtained  contained  the  duties  which 
he  had  not  yet  paid.  Hence  he  was  able  to  get 
capital  from  the  public  with  which  to  carry  on  his 
1  8  Ann.  Reg.  48. 


336  ANDREW  JACKSON 

business.  -  In  the  end  perhaps  he  became  bankrupt, 
and  did  not  pay  the  duties  at  all.  In  1831  a  re- 
port from  the  Treasury  stated  the  duty  bonds  in 
suit  at  $6,800,000,  of  which  only  11,000,000  was 
estimated  to  be  collectible.  Clay's  compromise, 
as  first  drawn,  had  a  preamble,  in  which  it  was 
stated  that,  after  March  3,  1840,  all  duties  should 
be  equal,  "  and  solely  for  the  purpose  and  with 
the  intent  of  providing  such  revenue  as  may  be 
necessary  to  an  economical  expenditure  by  the 
government,  without  regard  to  the  protection  or 
encouragement  of  any  branch  of  domestic  industry 
whatever."  1 

Webster  objected  to  the  horizontal  rate,  and  to 
an  attempt  to  pledge  future  Congresses.  He  was 
now  reduced,  after  having  previously  made  some 
of  the  most  masterly  arguments  ever  made  for  free 
trade,  to  defend  protection  by  such  devices  as  he 
could.  Now  he  derided  Adam  Smith  and  the  other 
economists.2  He  first  paltered  with  his  convictions 
on  the  tariff,  and  broke  his  moral  stamina  by  so 
doing.  Many  of  the  people  who  have  been  so  much 
astonished  at  his  "  sudden "  apostasy  on  slavery 
would  understand  it  more  easily,  if  their  own  judg- 
ment was  more  open  to  appreciate  his  earlier  apos- 
tasy on  free  trade.  February  13th,  he  introduced 
resolutions  against  the  compromise.3 

The  enforcing  act  passed  the  Senate,  February 
20,  1833,  by  32  to  8.  On  the  21st  the  compromise 

i  1  Curtis's  Webster,  434,  455. 

*  1  Webster's  Correspondence,  501.  8  43  NUes,  406. 


ENFORCEMENT  AND   COMPROMISE       337 

tariff  was  taken  up  in  the  Senate.  On  the  25th 
the  House  recommitted  the  tariff  bill  which  was 
there  pending,  with  instructions  to  the  committee 
to  report  the  compromise  bill.  On  the  26th  the 
latter  was  passed,  119  to  85.  On  the  same  day 
the  Senate  laid  Clay's  bill  on  the  table,  took  up 
the  same  bill  in  the  copy  sent  up  from  the  House, 
and  passed  it,  29  to  16.  On  the  27th  the  House 
passed  the  enforcing  bill,  111  to  40.  Thus  the 
olive  branch  and  the  rod  were  bound  up  together. 
There  was  one  moment,  in  January,  when  ex- 
Governor  Hamilton  seemed  ready  to  precipitate  a 
conflict,  and  when  Governor  Hayne  seemed  ready 
to  support  him  ; l  but  the  leading  nullifiers  deter- 
mined to  wait  until  Congress  adjourned.  February 
1st  was  the  day  appointed  for  nullification  to  go 
into  effect,  but  all  action  was  postponed.  The 
Legislature  replied  to  Jackson's  proclamation  by 
a  series  of  resolutions  which  charged  him  with 
usurpation  and  tyranny.2  Jackson  was  annoyed 
by  these  resolutions,  and  made  threats  against  the 
leading  nullifiers  in  January.  The  Governor  had 
summoned  the  convention  to  meet  again  on  March 
llth.  The  compromise  tariff  was  regarded  as  a 
substantial  victory  for  the  South.  It  became  a  law 
on  March  3d,  the  day  on  which  the  tariff  of  July 
14,  1832,  went  into  effect.  The  re-assembled  con- 
vention repealed  the  ordinance  of  nullification, 
passed  another  ordinance  nullifying  the  enforce- 
ment act,  and  adjourned.  It  is  not  quite  clear 
i  8  Ann.  Beg.  290.  2  43  NileS)  300. 


338  ANDREW  JACKSON 

whether  the  last  act  was  a  bit  of  fireworks  to  cele- 
brate the  conclusion  of  the  trouble,  or  was  seriously 
meant.  If  it  was  serious,  it  strongly  illustrated 
the  defective  sense  of  humor  which  characterized 
all  the  proceedings  of  the  nullifiers.  The  gentle- 
men who  had  nullified  a  tax,  and  then  nullified  a 
contingent  declaration  of  war,  would  probably,  in 
the  next  stage,  have  tried,  by  ordinance,  to  nullify 
a  battle  and  a  defeat.  Adams  quoted  a  remark  of 
Mangum,  in  1833,  that  "  the  course  of  the  southern 
politicians  for  the  last  six  or  eight  years  had  been 
one  of  very  great  and  mischievous  errors.  This  is 
now  admitted  by  almost  all  of  them." l  They 
threw  away  the  grandest  chance  any  men  have  ever 
had  to  serve  their  country. 

The  compromise  tariff  settled  nothing.  The  fact 
was  that  Clay  had  been  driven,  by  the  rapacity  of 
the  protected  interests,  to  a  point  from  which  he 
could  neither  advance  nor  recede,  and  Calhoun  had 
been  driven  by  the  nullification  enterprise  into  a 
similar  untenable  position.  Benton  says  that  Cal- 
houn was  afraid  of  Jackson,  who  had  threatened  to 
hang  the  nullifiers.  Curtis,  on  the  authority  of 
Crittenden,  says  that  Calhoun,  in  alarm,  sought  an 
interview  with  Clay,  and  that  Clay  intervened.2 
It  is  claimed  that  John  Tyler  brought  them  to- 
gether.3 They  met  and  patched  up  the  compro- 
mise, by  which  they  opened  an  escape  for  each 
ttther.  For  ten  years  afterwards  they  wrangled, 

i  9  Adams,  58.  2  1  Curtis's  Webster,  444. 

8  1  Tyler's  Tylers,  458. 


THE  BANK  AND  THE  THREE  PER  CENTS  339 

in  the  Senate,  over  the  question  who  had  been  in 
the  worse  predicament,  and  who  won  most,  in  1833. 
Clay  claimed  that  he  rescued  protection  from  the 
slaughter  which  awaited  it  in  Verplanck's  bill. 
Calhoun  claimed  that  the  compromise  tariff  was 
a  free-trade  victory,  won  by  nullification.  Clay 
said  that  he  made  the  compromise  out  of  pity  for 
Calhoun  and  South  Carolina,  who  were  in  peril. 
Calhoun  said  that  nullification  killed  the  tariff,  and 
that  Clay  was  flat  on  his  back  until  Calhoun  helped 
him  to  rise  and  escape  by  the  compromise.  The 
protected  interests  were  as  angry  with  Clay  as  if 
he  had  never  served  them.  They  accused  him  of 
treachery.  He  never  gained  anything  by  his  devo- 
tion to  protection.  He  was  right  at  least  in  say- 
ing that  protection  would  have  been  overthrown 
in  1833  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  compromise 
tariff.1 

Jackson's  animosity  towards  the  Bank,  in  the 
autumn  of  1832,  had  gathered  the  intensity  and 
bull-dog  ferocity  which  he  always  felt  for  an  enemy 
engaged  in  active  resistance.  In  the  matter  of 
the  three  per  cents,  the  Bank  gave  him  a  chance 
of  attack.  In  July,  General  Cadwallader  was  sent 
to  Europe  to  try  to  negotiate  with  the  holders  of 
the  three  per  cents  for  an  extension  of  the  loan 
for  a  year  beyond  October,  the  Bank  becoming 
the  debtor,  and  paying,  if  necessary,  four  per 
cent  on  the  extension.  The  Bank,  then,  instead  of 

1  See  a  speech  by  Clayton  on  Hugh  L.  White's  action,  Octobei 
5, 1842 ;  63  Niles,  106.  Parton,  III.  478,  has  the  same  story. 


340  ANDREW  JACKSON 

paying  the  debt  for  the  government,  desired  to 
intrude  itself  into  the  position  of  the  Treasury,  and 
extend  a  loan  which  the  Treasury  wanted  to  pay. 
Its  object  of  course  was  to  get  a  loan  at  three  (or 
four)  per  cent.  This  proceeding  was  obviously 
open  to  grave  censure.  The  obligation  of  the 
Treasury  would  not  cease,  although  the  Bank 
would  have  taken  the  public  money  appropriated 
to  the  payment  of  the  debt.  Five  million  dollars 
were  in  fact  transferred,  in  October,  on  the  books 
of  the  Bank,  to  the  Redemption  of  the  Public 
Debt  Account.  It  seems  to  be  indisputable  that 
the  Bank,  in  this  matter,  abused  its  relation  to  the 
Treasury  as  depository  of  the  public  funds.  Au- 
gust 22d  General  Cadwallader  made  an  arrange- 
ment with  the  Barings,  by  which  they  were  to  pay 
off  all  the  holders  of  the  stocks  who  were  not  will- 
ing to  extend  them  and  take  the  Bank  as  debtor. 
The  Barings  bought  $1,798,597,  and  extended 
$2,376,481.  The  arrangement  with  the  Barings 
was  to  be  secret,  but  it  was  published  in  a  New 
York  paper,  October  llth.  October  15th,  Biddle 
repudiated  the  contract,  because  under  it  the  Bank 
would  become  a  purchaser  of  public  stocks,  con- 
trary to  the  charter.  Would  he  have  repudiated 
the  contract  if  it  had  not  been  published  ? 

The  message  of  1832  was  temperate  in  tone,  but 
very  severe  against  the  Bank.  The  President  in- 
terpreted the  eagerness  of  the  Bank  to  get  pos- 
session of  the  three  per  cents  as  a  sign  of  weak- 
ness, and  he  urged  Congress  to  make  a  "  serious 


REPORTS  OF  1833  ON  THE  BANK         341 

investigation"  to  see  whether  the  public  depo- 
sits were  safe.  An  agent,  Henry  Toland,  was  ap- 
pointed to  investigate  on  behalf  of  the  Treasury. 
He  reported  favorably  to  the  Bank.  The  Com- 
mittee on  Ways  and  Means  also  investigated  the 
Bank.  The  President's  message  created  considera- 
ble alarm  for  a  time,  and,  at  some  places,  there 
were  signs  of  a  run  on  the  branches.1  February  13, 
1833,  Polk  reported  a  bill  to  sell  the  stock  owned 
by  the  nation  in  the  Bank.  It  was  rejected,  102 
to  91.  The  majority  of  the  Committee  on  Ways 
and  Means  reported  (Verplanck's  report)  that  the 
Bank  was  sound  and  that  the  deposits  were  safe. 
On  January  1,  1833,  the  assets  were  $80,800,000, 
the  liabilities  137,800,000  ;  leaving  $43,000,000  to 
pay  $35,000,000  of  capital.  The  circulation  was 
$17,500,000  ;  specie  $9,000,000.  The  local  banks 
were  estimated  to  have  $68,000,000  circulation  and 
$10,000,000  or  $11,000,000  specie.  The  minority 
report  (Polk's)  doubted  if  the  assets  were  all  good, 
and  hence  doubted  the  solvency  of  the  Bank.  It 
referred  to  the  western  debts,  and  gave,  in  a  supple- 
mental report,  evidence  of  the  character  of  these 
debts.  The  committee  investigated  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  Bank  in  relation  to  the  three  per  cents. 
The  minority  reported  that  they  could  not  find  out 
clearly  what  was  the  final  arrangement  made  by 
the  Bank,  but  it  appeared  that  the  certificates 
had  been  surrendered,  and  that  the  Bank  had, 
by  and  through  the  former  transaction,  obtained 
1  43  Niles,  315. 


342  ANDREW  JACKSON 

a  loan  in  Europe.  The  majority  said  that  the 
Bank  had  receded  from  the  project,  and  that  there 
was  nothing  more  to  say  about  it.1 

October  4,  1832,  Biddle  informed  the  directors 
that  the  Bank  was  strong  enough  to  relax  the 
orders,  which  had  been  given  to  the  western 
branches  in  the  previous  winter,  to  contract  their 
loans  and  remit  eastward.  He  then  supposed  that 
the  arrangement  with  the  Barings  about  the  three 
per  cents  had  been  concluded.  The  western  affairs, 
however,  were  at  this  time  approaching  a  crisis. 
The  supplementary  report  (Folk's)  by  the  minority 
of  the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means,  March  2, 
1833,2  contains  conclusive  evidence  that  the  west- 
ern branches  were  in  a  very  critical  condition  ;  that 
there  had  been  drawing  and  redrawing  between 
the  branches,  and  that  Biddle  knew  it.  The  direc- 
tors had  testified  to  the  committee  that  they  knew 
nothing  of  any  such  proceedings.  Some  of  the 
most  important  points  in  evidence  are  as  follows : 
September  11,  1832,  the  cashier  of  the  branch  at 
Lexington,  Kentucky,  wrote  that  he  was  enduring 
a  run.  Two  hundred  and  seventy-five  thousand 
dollars  were  sent  to  him  from  Philadelphia,  Louis- 
ville, St.  Louis,  New  Orleans,  and  Natchez.  A 
letter  from  Biddle  to  the  president  of  the  Nash- 
ville branch,  dated  November  20,  1832,  shows 
plainly  that  he  knew  that  redrawing  was  going 
on.  In  a  letter  from  the  president  of  the  Nash- 
rille  branch,  November  22d,  the  following  passage 
1  Document  E.  a  Ibid. 


THE  DRAFT  ON  FRANCE  343 

occurs :  "  We  will  not  be  able  to  get  the  debts  due 
this  office  paid ;  indeed,  if  any,  it  will  be  a  small 
part ;  the  means  are  not  in  the  country."  The 
same  branch  officer,  in  a  letter  of  November  24th, 
plainly  states  that  he  had  been  forced  to  collect 
drafts  drawn  on  him  by  the  parent  bank,  and  the 
New  York,  Baltimore,  Washington,  Richmond, 
Pittsburgh,  Cincinnati,  Louisville,  and  Lexington 
branches,  and  that  he  could  not  prevent  a  protest 
save  by  redrawing  on  New  Orleans.  Again,  No- 
vember 26th,  he  states  that  he  had,  within  a  year, 
collected  drafts  for  a  million  dollars  for  the  bank 
and  branches,  "  which,  with  small  exceptions,  have 
been  paid  through  our  bill  operations."  The  ma- 
jority of  the  committee  of  1832-33  had  interpreted 
the  fluctuations  in  the  amount  of  bills  at  Nashville 
as  proof  that,  when  the  crops  came  in,  the  debts 
were  cancelled.  The  minority  show  that  these  fluc- 
tuations were  due  to  the  presence  of  the  "  racers  " 
at  one  or  the  other  end  of  the  course.  It  is  quite 
beyond  question  that  a  mass  of  accommodation 
bills  were  chasing  each  other  from  branch  to  branch 
in  the  years  1832-33,  and  that  they  formed  a  mass 
of  debt,  which  the  Bank  could  not,  for  the  time, 
control. 

March  2,  1833,  the  House  adopted,  109  to  46,  a 
resolution  that  the  deposits  might  safely  be  con- 
tinued in  the  Bank.  The  reports  of  the  committee 
had  not  been  carefully  considered  by  anybody. 
The  Bank  question  was  now  a  party  question,  and 
men  voted  on  it  according  to  party,  not  according 


344  ANDREW  JACKSON 

to  evidence.  Whatever  force  might  be  attributed 
to  any  of  the  facts  brought  out  by  Polk  in  the 
minority  report,  it  does  not  appear  that  anybody  in 
Congress  really  thought  that  the  Bank  was  insolvent 
and  the  deposits  in  danger.  His  supplemental  re- 
port bears  date  March  2d,  that  is  to  say,  the  day 
011  which  the  House  acted.  Polk  did  not  propose 
to  withdraw  the  deposits.  He  wanted  to  avoid  any 
positive  action.  McDuffie  objected  to  this  policy 
that,  if  Congress  took  no  action,  Jackson  would 
remove  the  deposits  on  the  principle  that  silence 
gives  consent.1 

The  first  instalment  of  the  payment  by  France 
was  due  February  2, 1833.2  The  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  did  not  draw  until  February  7th.  Then 
he  drew  a  sight  #raft,  which  he  sold  to  the  Bank  for 
$961,240.30.  Congress,  March  2d,  passed  an  act 
ordering  the  Secretary  to  loan  this  sum  at  interest. 
The  treaty  of  July  4,  1831,  was  unpopular  in 
France,  and  the  French  Chambers  had  not  passed 
any  appropriation  to  meet  the  payments  provided 
for  in  it.  The  draft  was  therefore  protested,  and 
was  taken  up  by  Hottinguer  for  the  Bank,  because 
it  bore  the  indorsement  of  the  Bank.  The  Bank 
had  put  the  money  to  the  credit  of  the  Treasury, 
and  it  claimed  to  prove,  by  quoting  the  account, 
that  the  funds  had  been  drawn.  Hence  it  declared 
that  it  was  out  of  funds  for  twice  the  amount  of 
the  bill.  It  demanded  fifteen  per  cent  damages 
under  an  old  law  of  Maryland,  which  was  the  law 
*  44  NUes,  108.  2  See  p.  217. 


PROJECT  OF  REMOVING  THE  DEPOSITS    345 

of  the  District  of  Columbia.  The  Treasury  paid 
the  amount  of  the  bill,  and  offered  to  pay  the 
actual  loss  incurred.  July  8,  1834,  Biddle  in- 
formed the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  that  the  sum 
of  $170,041  would  be  retained  out  of  a  three  and 
a  half  per  cent  dividend,  payable  July  17th,  on  the 
stock  owned  by  the  United  States.  March  2, 1838, 
the  United  States  brought  suit  against  the  Bank, 
in  the  federal  Circuit  Court  of  Pennsylvania,  for 
the  amount  so  withheld.  It  got  judgment  for 
8251,243.54.  The  Bank  appealed  to  the  Supreme 
Court,  which,  in  1844,  reversed  the  judgment,  find- 
ing that  the  Bank  was  the  true  holder  of  the  bill 
and  entitled  to  damages.1  On  a  new  trial  the 
Circuit  Court  gave  judgment  for  the  Bank.  The 
United  States  then  appealed  on  the  ground  that  a 
bill  drawn  by  a  government  on  a  government  was 
not  subject  to  the  law  merchant.2  The  Supreme 
Court  sustained  this  view,  in  1847,  and  again  re- 
versed the  decision  of  the  Circuit  Court.3  No  fur- 
ther action  was  taken. 

In  the  spring  of  1833,  McLane  was  transferred 
from  the  Treasury  to  the  State  Department.  He 
was  opposed  to  the  removal  of  the  deposits  by 
executive  act,  which  was  now  beginning  to  be  urged 
in  the  inmost  administration  circles.  William  J. 
Duane,  of  Pennsylvania,  was  appointed  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury.  This  appointment  was  Jackson's 

1  2  Howard,  711. 

2  Suppose  that  France  had  drawn  on  the  United  States  for  the 
sum  due  in  1787.  8  5  Howard,  382. 


346  ANDREW  JACKSON 

own  personal  act.  He  had  admired  Duane's  father, 
the  editor  of  the  "  Aurora,"  and  he  declared  that 
the  son  was  a  chip  of  the  old  block.  In  this  he 
was  mistaken.  Duane  was  a  very  different  man 
from  his  father.1  He  was  a  lawyer  of  very  good 
standing.  He  had  never  been  a  politician  or  office- 
holder, but  had  shunned  that  career.  Lewis  says 
that  he  does  not  know  who  first  proposed  the  re- 
moval of  the  deposits,  but  that  it  began  to  be  talked 
of  in  the  inner  administration  circles  soon  after 
Jackson's  second  election.  In  the  cabinet  McLane 
and  Cass  were  so  earnestly  opposed  to  the  project 
that  it  was  feared  they  would  resign.  McLane 
sent  for  Kendall  to  know  why  it  was  desired  to 
execute  such  a  project.  This  was  before  McLane 
left  the  Treasury.  Kendall  endeavored  to  per- 
suade him.  Cass  finally  said  that  he  did  not 
understand  the  question.  Woodbury  was  neutral. 
Barry  assented  to  the  act,  but  brought  no  force  to 
support  it.  Taney  strongly  supported  the  project. 
He  was  an  old  federalist,  who  had  come  into  Jack- 
son's party  in  1824,  on  account  of  Jackson's  letters 
to  Monroe  about  non-partisan  appointments.2  He 
was  Jackson's  most  trusted  adviser  in  1833 :  so  his 
biographer  says,  and  it  seems  to  be  true.  Van 
Bur  en  warmly  opposed  the  removal  at  first.  Ken- 
dall persuaded  him.  He  seems  to  have  faltered 

1  Parton  obtained  from  William  B.  Lewis  an  inside  account  of 
the  removal  of  the  deposits.     Duane  wrote  a  full  account  of  it, 
and  there  is  another  account  in  Kendall's  Autobiography,  but  it  is 
by  the  editor,  and  only  at  second  hand  from  Kendall. 

2  Tyler's  Taney,  158. 


PROJECT  OF  REMOVING  THE  DEPOSITS    347 

afterwards,  but  Kendall  held  him  up  to  the  point.1 
Benton  warmly  approved  of  the  removal,  but 
was  not  active  in  bringing  it  about.  Lewis  op- 
posed it. 

The  proceeding  is  traced,  by  all  the  evidence,  to 
Kendall  and  Blair  as  the  moving  spirits,2  with 
Reuben  M.  Whitney  as  a  coadjutor.  These  men 
had  no  public  official  responsibility.  They  cer- 
tainly were  not  recognized  by  the  nation  as  the 
men  who  ought  to  have  a  controlling  influence  on 
public  affairs.  They  were  animated  by  prejudice 
and  rancor  sixteen  years  old.  Andrew  Jackson's 
power  and  popularity,  moving  now  under  the  im- 
pulse of  the  passions  which  animate  an  Indian  on 
the  war-path,  were  the  engine  with  which  these 
men  battered  down  a  great  financial  institution. 
The  Bank  had  been  guilty  of  great  financial  errors, 
but  they  were  not  by  any  means  beyond  remedy. 
The  Bank  of  England,  at  the  same  period,  was 
guilty  of  great  financial  errors.  Blair  and  Kendall 
were  not  working  for  sound  finance.  Blair's  doc- 
trine was  that  the  Bank  would  use  the  public 
deposits  as  a  means  of  corrupting  the  political  in- 
stitutions of  the  country.  If  that  were  true,  it 
proved  the  error  of  having  a  great  surplus  of  public 
money  in  the  Treasury,  i.  e.,  in  the  Bank.  He 
said  that  the  Bank  would  corrupt  Congress.3  In 
August  Duane  wrote :  "  It  is  true  that  there  is  an 
irresponsible  cabal  that  has  more  power  than  the 

1  Kendall's  Autobiography,  383. 

*  Kendall's  Autobiography,  375.          8  Lewis  in  3  Parton,  503. 


348  ANDREW  JACKSON 

people  are  aware  of."  "  What  I  object  to  is  that 
there  is  an  under-current,  a  sly,  whispering,  slan- 
dering system  pursued."  1  In  his  history  of  the 
matter,  written  five  years  later,  he  says :  "  I  had 
heard  rumors  of  the  existence  of  an  influence  at 
Washington,  unknown  to  the  Constitution  and  to 
the  country;  and  the  conviction  that  they  were 
well  founded  now  became  irresistible.  I  knew 
that  four  of  the  six  members  of  the  last  cabinet, 
and  that  four  of  the  six  members  of  the  present 
cabinet,  opposed  a  removal  of  the  deposits,  and 
yet  their  exertions  were  nullified  by  individuals, 
whose  intercourse  with  the  President  was  clandes- 
tine. During  his  absence  [in  New  England] 
several  of  those  individuals  called  on  me,  and 
made  many  of  the  identical  observations,  in  the 
identical  language  used  by  himself.  They  re 
presented  Congress  as  corruptible,  and  the  new 
members  as  in  need  of  special  guidance.  ...  In 
short,  I  felt  satisfied  from  all  that  I  saw  and 
heard,  that  factious  and  selfish  views  alone  guided 
those  who  had  influence  with  the  Executive,  and 
that  the  true  welfare  and  honor  of  the  country 
constituted  no  part  of  their  objects."  2  Lewis  gives 
a  report  of  a  conversation  with  Jackson,  in  which 
he  (Lewis)  tried  to  persuade  Jackson  to  desist 
from  the  project.  Jackson's  points  were,  "  I  have 
no  confidence  in  Congress."  "  If  the  Bank  is  per- 
mitted to  have  the  public  money,  there  is  no  power 
that  can  prevent  it  from  obtaining  a  charter;  it 

1  Duane,  130.  2  Duane,  9. 


REMOVAL  OF  THE  DEPOSITS  349 

will  have  it,  if  it  has  to  buy  up  all  Congress,  and 
the  public  funds  would  enable  it  to  do  so !  "  "  If 
we  leave  the  means  of  corruption  in  its  hands, 
the  presidential  veto  will  avail  nothing."1  The 
statements  in  Kendall's  "  Autobiography "  are  in 
perfect  accord  with  these.  It  is  perfectly  plain 
who  was  at  the  bottom  of  this  project,  what  their 
motives  were,  how  they  set  to  work,  how  they  gave 
a  bias  to  Jackson's  mind,  and  furnished  him  with 
arguments  and  phrases.  It  is  also  worthy  of  the 
most  careful  attention  that  they  and  Jackson  were 
now  busy  "  saving  the  country,"  holding  in  check 
the  constitutional  organs  of  the  country,  above  all 
Congress ;  and  that  they  were  proceeding  upon  as- 
sumptions about  the  motives  and  purposes  of  the 
Bank  which  were  not  true  and  had  not  even  been 
tested,  and  upon  assumptions  in  regard  to  the 
character  of  Congress  which  were  insulting  to  the 
nation.  The  Jeffersonian  non-interference  theories 
were  now  all  left  far  behind.  Jacksonian  demo- 
cracy was  approaching  already  the  Napoleonic  type 
of  the  democratic  empire,  in  which  "  the  elect  of 
the  nation  "  is  charged  to  protect  the  state  against 
everybody,  chiefly,  however,  against  any  constitu- 
tional organs. 

On  the  first  day  of  Duane's  official  life,  June  1, 
1833,  Whitney  called  on  him,  obviously  in  a  cer- 
tain ambassadorial  capacity,  and  made  known  to 
him  the  project  to  remove  the  deposits  from  the 
Bank,  and  to  use  local  banks  as  depositories  and 
1  Lewis  in  3  Parton,  505  et  seq. 


350  ANDREW   JACKSON 

fiscal  agents.  A  few  days  later  Jackson  started 
on  a  progress  through  New  England.  The  recent 
overthrow  of  nullification  had  rendered  him  very 
popular.1  No  one  knew  of  any  new  trouble  brew- 
ing, and  there  was  a  general  outburst  of  enthusi- 
asm and  satisfaction  that  a  great  cause  of  political 
discord  had  been  removed,  and  that  peace  and 
quiet  might  be  enjoyed.  Jackson  was  feted  en- 
thusiastically and  generally.  Harvard  College 
made  him  a  Doctor  of  Laws.  Adams  said  that  it 
was  "  a  sycophantic  compliment."  "  As  myself 
an  affectionate  child  of  our  Alma  Mater,  I  would 
not  be  present  to  witness  her  disgrace  in  conferring 
her  highest  literary  honors  upon  a  barbarian,  who 
could  not  write  a  sentence  of  grammar  and  hardly 
could  spell  his  own  name."  2  Jackson  was  very  ill 
at  this  time.3  Adams  wrote  a  spiteful  page  in  the 
"  Diary,"  alleging  that  "  four  fifths  of  his  sickness 
is  trickery,  and  the  other  fifth  mere  fatigue."  "  He 
is  so  ravenous  of  notoriety  that  he  craves  the  sym- 
pathy for  sickness  as  a  portion  of  hit,  glory."4 
The  low  personal  injustice  which  is  born  of  party 
hatred  is  here  strikingly  illustrated. 

Duane  did  not  accept  the  role  for  which  he  had 
been  selected.  He  objected  to  the  removal  of  the 
deposits.  Jackson  sent  to  him  from  Boston  a  long 
argument,  written  by  Kendall,  to  try  to  persuade 
him.  Jackson  returned  early  in  July.  The  ques- 
tion of  the  removal  was  then  debated  between  him 

1  Quincy's  Figures,  354.  2  8  Adams,  546. 

8  Quincy's  Figures,  368  et  seq.  *  4  Adams,  5* 


KENDALL'S  NEGOTIATIONS  351 

and  Duane  very  seriously,  Duane  standing  his 
ground.  It  is  evident  that  Taney  was  then  asked 
to  take  the  Treasury  in  case  Duane  should  continue 
recalcitrant.  Jackson  left  Washington  on  an  ex- 
cursion to  the  Rip  Raps  without  having  come  to  an 
arrangement  with  Duane.1 

In  July  rumors  became  current  that  the  Presi- 
dent intended  to  remove  the  deposits.2  August  5, 
1833,  while  Jackson  was  absent,  Taney  wrote  to 
him,  encouraging  him  to  prosecute  the  project  of 
removal,  and  thoroughly  approving  of  it.  It  is  a 
sycophantic  letter.3  In  August,  Kendall  went  on 
a  tour  through  the  Middle  and  Eastern  States  to 
negotiate  with  the  local  banks,  so  as  to  find  out 
whether  they  would  undertake  the  fiscal  duties. 
His  first  project  seems  to  have  been  based  on  the 
New  York  Safety  Fund  system.  He  got  no  en- 
couragement for  this.4  To  more  general  inquiries 
as  to  a  willingness  to  enter  into  some  arrangement 
he  got  a  number  of  favorable  replies.5  Comment- 
ing on  these  replies,  Duane  says :  "  It  was  into  this 
chaos  that  I  was  asked  to  plunge  the  fiscal  con- 
cerns of  the  country  at  a  moment  when  they  were 

1  In  May,  1833,  Jackson  laid  the  corner-stone  of  a  monument  to 
Washington's  mother.     On  his  way  to  the  site  of  the  monument, 
while  the  steamboat  was  at  Alexandria,  Lieutenant  Randolph,  who 
had  been  dismissed  from  the  navy  because  he  could  not  make  his 
accounts  good,  committed  an  assault  on  the  President,  and  at- 
tempted to  pull  his  nose.     Considerable  political  heat  was  excited 
by  the  extra  legal  measures  taken  to  punish  Randolph  for  hia 
outrage.    44  Niles,  170. 

2  44  Niles,  353.  8  Tyler's  Taney,  195. 
4  Document  F,  page  10.  6  Document  F. 


352  ANDREW  JACKSON 

conducted  by  the  legitimate  agent  with  the  utmost 
simplicity,  safety,  and  despatch."  1 

Rives  published  a  story,  in  1856,  in  the  "  Globe," 
to  the  effect  that,  while  Jackson  was  at  the  Rip 
Raps,  where  Blair  was  with  him,  a  letter  was  re- 
ceived from  Kendall  saying  that  he  had  had  such 
ill  success  that  the  project  of  removing  the  deposits 
must  be  given  up.  Jackson  declared  that  the 
Bank  was  broken.  Blair  tried  to  soothe  him,  say- 
ing that  it  was  politically  dangerous,  but  not 
broken.  Jackson  insisted.  He  now  had  formed 
an  opinion  of  his  own.  Better  than  anybody  else 
he  had  seen  through  Biddle's  plausible  and  sophis- 
tical reasons  for  desiring  to  postpone  the  pay- 
ment of  the  three  per  cents,  and  he  had  adopted  a 
conviction  that  the  Bank  was  financially  weak. 
He  reasoned  that  Biddle  was  proud  and  brave,  and 
that  he  never  would  have  come  to  Washington  to 
beg  Jackson  to  defer  the  payment,  if  the  Bank  had 
not  been  so  weak  that  he  was  forced  to  it.  Rives 
added  that  Kendall,  when  asked,  denied  that  he 
ever  wrote  any  letter  despairing  of  the  removal.2 

On  Jackson's  return  he  took  up  the  business  at 
once.  Of  course  Kendall's  negotiations  could  not 
be  kept  secret.  Niles's  "  Register  "  for  September 
7, 1833,  contains  a  long  list  of  extracts  from  differ- 
ent newspapers  presenting  different  speculations  as 
to  the  probability  of  the  removal  of  the  deposits. 
The  money  market  was,  of  course,  immediately 
affected.  The  Bank  had  ordered  its  branches  to 

1  Duane,  96.  2  Hudson's  Journalism,  250. 


PAPER  READ  IN  THE  CABINET  353 

buy  no  drafts  having  over  ninety  days  to  run. 
This  was  too  short  a  time  for  "  racers,"  considering 
the  difficulty  of  communication.  The  western 
debts  had  now  been  considerably  curtailed  by  the 
strenuous  efforts  which  had  been  made  during  the 
year.  In  the  cabinet,  Duane  was  still  resisting. 
The  sixteenth  section  of  the  Bank  charter  gave  to 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  by  specific  desig- 
nation, the  power  to  remove  the  deposits. 

By  the  acts  of  July  2,  1789,  and  May  10,  1800, 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  reports  to  the  House 
of  Representatives.  John  Adams  objected  to  the 
position  thus  created  for  the  Secretary  of  the  Trea- 
sury.1 At  other  times  also  it  has  caused  com- 
plaint.2 His  position  certainly  was  anomalous. 
His  powers  and  responsibilities  were  in  no  consist- 
ent relation  to  each  other.  He  was  independent 
of  the  President  in  his  functions,  yet  might  be 
removed  by  him.  He  reported  to  Congress  what 
he  had  done,  yet  could  not  be  removed  by  Congress 
except  by  impeachment.  Jackson  now  advanced 
another  step  in  his  imperial  theory.  He  said  to 
Duane  :  I  take  the  responsibility  ;  and  he  extended 
his  responsibility  over  Duane  on  the  theory  that 
the  Secretary  was  a  subordinate,  bound  only  to 
obey  orders.  What  then  was  the  sense  of  provid- 
ing in  the  charter  that  the  Secretary  might  use 

1  1  Gibbs,  569.    8  J.  Adams's  Life  and  Works,  555. 

2  4  Adams,  501.     See  a  history  of  the  Treasury  Department  in 
a  report  of  the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means,  March  4,  1834, 
46  Niles,  39. 


354  ANDREW  JACKSON 

a  certain  discretion,  and  that  he  should  state  to 
Congress  his  reasons  for  any  use  he  made  of  it  ? 
Jackson's  responsibility  was  only  a  figure  of  speech  ; 
he  was  elected  for  a  set  term,  and  could  not  and 
would  not  stand  again.  As  Congress  stood  there 
was  no  danger  of  impeachment.  His  position, 
therefore,  was  simply  that  he  was  determined  to 
do  what  he  thought  best  to  do,  because  there  was 
no  power  at  hand  to  stop  him. 

On  the  18th  of  September  the  President  read, 
in  the  meeting  of  his  cabinet,  a  paper  prepared  by 
Taney,1  in  which  he  argued  that  the  deposits  ought 
to  be  removed.  The  grounds  were,  the  three  per 
cents,  the  French  bill,  the  political  activity  of  the 
Bank,  and  its  unconstitutionality.  He  said  that 
he  would  not  dictate  to  the  Secretary,  but  he  took 
all  the  responsibility  of  deciding  that,  after  Octo- 
ber 1st,  no  more  public  money  should  be  deposited 
in  the  Bank,  and  that  the  current  drafts  should  be 
allowed  to  withdraw  all  money  then  in  it.  Duane 
refused  to  give  the  order  and  refused  to  resign. 
He  was  dismissed,  September  23d.  Taney  was 
transferred  to  the  Treasury.  He  gave  the  order. 
Taney  told  Kendall  that  he  was  not  a  politician, 
and  that,  in  taking  a  political  office,  he  sacrificed 
his  ambition,  which  was  to  be  a  judge  of  the 
Supreme  Court.2 

Duane  at  once  published  the  final  correspond- 
ence between  the  President  and  himself,  in  which 
he  gave  fifteen  reasons  why  the  deposits  ought  not 

1  Tyler's  Taney,  204.  2  Kendall's  Autobiography,  186. 


KENDALL'S  NEGOTIATIONS  355 

to  be  removed.1  One  of  them  was,  "I  believe 
that  the  efforts  made  in  various  quarters  to  hasten 
the  removal  of  the  deposits  did  not  originate  with 
patriots  or  statesmen,  but  in  schemes  to  promote 
factious  and  selfish  purposes."  The  administra- 
tion press  immediately  turned  upon  Duane  with 
fierce  abuse.2 

The  removal  of  the  deposits  was  a  violent  and 
unnecessary  step,  even  from  Jackson's  stand-point, 
as  Lewis  tried  to  persuade  him.3  The  Bank  had 
no  chance  of  a  recharter,  unless  one  is  prepared  to 
believe  that  it  could  and  would  buy  enough  con- 
gressmen to  get  a  two-thirds  majority.  If  it  had 
been  willing  to  do  that,  it  had  enough  money  of  its 
own  for  the  purpose,  even  after  the  deposits  were 
withdrawn.  The  removal  caused  a  great  commo- 
tion,—  even  a  panic.4  Bank  stock  fell  one  and 
one  half  per  cent  at  New  York,  but  it  recovered 
when  the  paper  read  in  the  cabinet  was  received, 
because  the  grounds  were  only  the  old  charges. 
The  public  confidence  in  the  Bank  had  not  been 
shaken  by  the  charges,  investigations,  and  reports. 
The  Bank  replied  to  the  President's  paper  by  a 
long  manifesto,  in  which  it  pursued  him  point  by 
point.5  No  doubt  Biddle  wrote  this  paper.  In 

1  45  Niles,  236. 

2  In  a  letter  dated  June  7,  1837,  Duane  complained  that  he 
found  himself  completely  "  ostracized,  disowned,  outlawed  on  all 
sides."     "  My  position  is  a  warning  to  all  persons  to  adhere  to 
party,  right  or  wrong."     New  York  Times,  May  13,  1894 

8  Lewis  in  3  Parton,  506.  4  45  Niles,  65. 

6  45  Niles,  248. 


356  ANDREW  JACKSON 

order  to  defend  the  Bank  in  the  matter  of  the  three 
per  cents,  he  resorted  to  the  tactics  noticed  before. 
He  said  that  there  was  heavy  indebtedness  to 
Europe  in  1832,  on  account  of  the  importations 
of  1831.  He  wanted  to  prevent  an  exportation  of 
specie  and  give  the  country  leisure  to  pay  that 
debt.  He  said  that  the  Bank  was  at  ease,  and 
would  have  kept  quiet  if  it  had  considered  only  its 
own  interests.  Nothing  less  than  the  movements 
which  involve  continents  and  cover  years  would  do 
for  him  to  explain  his  policy.  No  motive  less  than 
universal  benevolence  would  suffice  to  account  for 
the  action  of  the  Bank.  These  pretences  were,  as 
similar  ones  almost  always  are,  not  true. 

The  average  monthly  balance  in  the  Bank,  to 
the  credit  of  the  Treasury,  from  1818  to  1833, 
was  $6,700,000.  In  1832  it  was  $11,300,000.  In 
1833  it  was  $8,500,000.  In  September,  1833,  it 
was  $9,100,000.1  Kendall  reported  to  a  cabinet 
meeting  the  results  of  his  negotiations  with  the 
banks.  One  bank  was  objected  to  "on  political 
grounds."  2  Twenty-three  were  selected  before  the 
end  of  the  year.  The  chance  for  favoritism  was 
speedily  perceived.  The  first  intention  was  to  use 
the  Bank  of  the  Metropolis,  Washington,  as  the 
head  of  the  system  of  deposit  banks,  although  no 
system  was  devised.  In  fact,  the  administration 
had  taken  the  work  of  destruction  in  hand  with 
great  vigor,  but  it  never  planned  a  system  to  take 
the  place  of  the  old  one.  The  Bank  of  the  United 

1  Document  H.  2  Kendall's  Autobiography,  387. 


DISORDER  IN  THE  FISCAL  SYSTEM      357 

States  had,  of  course,  been  compelled  to  devise  its 
own  measures  for  carrying  on  the  business  of  the 
Treasury,  so  far  as  it  was  charged  with  that  busi- 
ness. The  Treasury  was  now  forced  to  oversee,  if 
it  did  not  originate,  the  system  of  relations  be- 
tween the  deposit  banks.  January  30,  1834,  Silas 
Wright  made  a  statement  which  was  understood 
to  be  authoritative.  He  said  that  the  Executive 
had  entered  again  upon  the  control  of  the  public 
money  which  belonged  to  him  before  the  national 
Bank  was  chartered  ;  that  the  administration  would 
bring  forward  no  law  to  regulate  the  deposits,  but 
that  the  Executive  would  proceed  with  the  experi- 
ment of  using  local  banks.  Webster  expressed 
strong  disappointment  and  disapproval,  claiming 
that  there  should  be  a  law.1  March  18,  1834, 
Webster  proposed  a  bill  to  extend  the  charter  of 
the  Bank  of  the  United  States  for  six  years,  with- 
out monopoly,  the  public  money  to  be  deposited  in 
it,  it  to  pay  to  the  Treasury  $200,000  annually  on 
March  4th,  none  of  its  notes  to  be  for  less  than 
$20.00.  The  Bank  men  would  not  agree  to  sup- 
port it.  It  was  tabled  and  never  called  up.2  April 
15,  1834,  six  months  after  the  deposits  were  re- 
moved, Taney  sent  to  the  Committee  on  Ways  and 
Means  a  plan  for  the  organization  of  the  deposit 
bank  system,  but  it  was  a  mere  vague  outline.3 

1  45  Niles,  400. 

2  46  Niles,  52;  1  Curtis's  Webster,  485;  4  Webster's  Work* 
82. 

3  46  Niles,  157. 


358  ANDREW  JACKSON 

December  15, 1834,  "Woodbury  sent  in  a  long  essay 
on  currency  and  banking,  but  no  positive  scheme 
or  arrangement.  It  was  not  until  June,  1836,  that 
the  system  was  regulated  by  measures  aiming  at 
efficiency  and  responsibility. 

Taney  desired  that  Kendall  should  be  president 
of  the  Bank  of  the  Metropolis  and  organize  the 
system,  but  Kendall's  readiness,  which  had  not  be- 
fore failed,  had  now  reached  its  limit.  The  Bank 
of  the  Metropolis  was  then  asked  to  admit  Whit- 
ney as  agent  and  correspondent  of  the  deposit 
banks.  The  bank  refused  to  do  this,  and  the  plan 
of  making  that  bank  the  head  was  given  up.1  The 
banks  were  recommended  to  employ  Whitney  as 
agent  and  correspondent  at  Washington  for  their 
dealings  with  the  Treasury.  He  was  thus  placed 
in  a  position  of  great  power  and  influence.  He 
did  not  escape  the  charge  of  having  abused  it,  and 
an  investigation,  in  1837,  produced  evidence  very 
adverse  to  his  good  character.  Part  of  the  cor- 
respondence between  him  and  the  banks  was  then 
published.  From  that  correspondence  it  is  plain 
that  the  chief  argument  brought  to  support  an  ap- 
plication for  a  share  of  the  deposits,  or  other  favor, 
was  devotion  to  Jackson  and  hatred  of  the  Bank 
of  the  United  States.2  It  is  not  proved  that  the 
deposits  were  ever  used  by  the  Bank  of  the  United 
States  for  any  political  purpose  whatever.  It  is 
conclusively  proved  that  the  deposits  were  used 
by  Jackson's  administration,  through  Whitney's 
1  Kendall's  Autobiography,  388.  2  52  Niles,  91. 


THE  TRANSFER  DRAFTS  359 

agency,  to  reward  adherents  and  to  win  supporters. 
The  first  banks  which  took  up  the  system  also,  in 
some  cases,  used  the  deposits  which  were  given  to 
them  to  put  themselves  in  the  position  which  they 
were  required,  by  the  theory  of  the  deposit  system, 
to  occupy.  Taney  assumed  that  the  Bank  of  the 
United  States  would  make  a  spiteful  attempt  to 
injure  the  deposit  banks  by  calling  on  them  to  pay 
balances.  It  was  then  considered  wrong  and  cruel 
for  one  bank  to  call  on  another  to  pay  balances 
promptly.  Taney,  therefore,  placed  some  large 
drafts  on  the  Bank  of  the  United  States  in  the 
hands  of  officers  of  the  deposit  banks  at  New 
York,  Philadelphia,  and  Baltimore,  so  that  they 
might  offset  any  such  malicious  demand.  Other- 
wise, the  drafts  were  not  to  be  used.  The  Bank 
took  no  steps  which  afforded  even  a  pretext  for 
using  these  drafts,  but  the  president  of  the  Union 
Bank  of  Maryland  cashed  one  of  them  for 
$100,000  a  few  days  after  he  got  it,  and  used  the 
money  in  stock  speculations.1  For  fear  of  scandal 
this  act  was  passed  over  by  the  Executive,  but  it 
led  to  an  investigation  by  Congress.  Taney  was  a 
stockholder  in  the  Union  Bank.2  The  Manhattan 
Company  used  one  of  these  drafts  for  $500,000.3 

1  Kendall's  Autobiography,  389.     Cf.  Document  H,  page  339. 
It  is  well  worth  while  to  read  these  two  passages  together  in 
order  to  see  how  much  deceit  there  was  in  the  proceedings  about 
the  removal  of  the  deposits. 

2  Quincy's  Adams,  227.     He  sold  his  stock  February  18,  1834. 
Document  M. 

3  Document  H. 


360  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Taney  claimed  the  power  to  make  these  transfers. 
He  referred  it  back  to  a  precedent  set  by  Craw- 
ford,1 who,  in  his  turn,  when  he  had  been  called  to 
account  for  it,  had  referred  it  back  to  Gallatin. 
The  source  of  the  stream,  however,  was  not  Gal- 
latin, but  William  Jones,  Acting  Secretary.2  The 
baneful  effects  of  the  large  surplus  of  public 
money  are  plain  enough. 

At  the  session  of  1833-34  the  message  alleged, 
as  the  occasion  of  removing  the  deposits,  the  report 
of  the  government  directors  of  the  Bank,  which 
showed,  as  Jackson  said,  that  the  Bank  had  been 
turned  into  an  electioneering  engine.  It  was  never 
alleged  that  the  Bank  had  spent  money  other- 
wise than  in  distributing  Gallatin's  pamphlet  on 
currency,  McDuffie's  report  of  1830,  and  similar 
documents.  Some  might  think  that  it  was  not 
wise  and  right  for  the  Bank  so  to  defend  itself, 
since  politics  were  involved ;  but  its  judge  was  now 
the  most  interested  paL-ty  in  the  contest,  the  one 
to  whom  that  offence  would  seem  most  heinous, 
and  he  insisted  on  imposing  a  penalty  at  his  own 
discretion,  on  an  ex  parte  statement  of  his  own  ap- 
pointees, and  a  penalty  which  could  not  be  consid- 
ered appropriate  or  duly  measured  to  the  offence. 
He  also  charged  the  Bank  with  manufacturing 
a  panic.  Taney  reported  "  his  "  reasons  for  the 

1  Document  F. 

2  American  State  Papers,  4  Finance,  266,  279.     Cf.  1  Gallatin's 
Writings,  80.     It  has  been  asserted  that  Hamilton  used  the  same 
power,     ingeraoll,  279  ;  cf.  6  Hamilton's  Works,  175. 


REASONS  FOR  REMOVAL  361 

removal.  He  argued  that  the  Secretary  must  dis- 
charge his  duties  under  the  supervision  of  the 
President ;  that  the  Secretary  alone  had  power  to 
remove  the  deposits ;  that  Congress  could  not  order 
it  to  be  done ;  that  the  Secretary  could  do  it,  if  he 
thought  best,  for  any  reason,  not  necessarily  only 
when  the  Bank  had  misconducted  itself.  He  put 
the  removal  which  had  been  executed  on  the 
ground  of  public  interest.  The  people  had  shown, 
in  the  election,  that  they  did  not  want  the  Bank 
rechartered.  It  was  not  best  to  remove  the  de- 
posits suddenly  when  the  charter  should  expire. 
He  blamed  the  Bank  for  increasing  its  loans 
from  December  1,  1832,  to  August  2,  1833,  from 
161,500,000  to  164,100,000,  and  then  reducing 
them,  from  that  date  until  October  2,  1833,  to 
160,000,000.  He  said  that  the  Bank  had  forfeited 
public  confidence,  had  excluded  the  government 
directors  from  knowledge  to  which  they  were  en- 
titled, had  shown  selfishness  in  the  affair  of  the 
French  bill,  had  done  wrongly  about  the  three 
per  cents,  had  granted  favors  to  editors,  and  had 
distributed  documents  to  control  elections.  He 
favored  the  use  of  the  local  banks  as  fiscal  agents 
of  the  government. 

December  9th  the  Bank  memorialized  Congress 
against  the  removal  of  the  deposits  as  a  breach  of 
contract.  A  great  struggle  over  the  Bank  question 
occupied  the  whole  session.  The  Senate  refused, 
25  to  20,  to  confirm  the  reappointment  of  the  gov- 
ernment directors,  who  were  said  to  have  acted  as 


362  ANDREW  JACKSON 

the  President's  spies.  Jackson  sent  the  names  in 
again  with  a  long  message,1  and  they  were  rejected, 
30  to  11.  Taney's  appointment  as  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  was  rejected,  to  Jackson's  great  in- 
dignation. Taney  was  then  nominated  for  judge 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  again  rejected.  Mar- 
shall died  in  July,  1835.  Taney  was  appointed 
Chief  Justice,  December  28,  1835,  and  confirmed, 
March  15,  1836. 

December  llth  Clay  moved  a  call  for  a  copy  of 
the  paper  read  in  the  cabinet.  Jackson  refused  it 
on  the  ground  that  Congress  had  no  business  with 
it.  The  document,  in  fact,  had  no  standing  in  our 
system  of  government.  It  was  another  extension 
of  personal  government,  by  the  adoption  of  a  Na- 
poleonic procedure.  The  Emperor  made  known 
his  will  by  a  letter  of  instructions  to  his  minister, 
and  this,  when  published,  informed  the  public. 
Jackson  used  his  "  paper  read  in  the  cabinet "  in 
just  that  way.  By  publishing  it  he  violated  the 
secrecy  and  privilege  of  the  cabinet,  and  made  it  a 
public  document,  but  when  it  was  called  for  he 
fell  back  on  cabinet  privilege.2  If  Jackson's  doc- 
trine was  sound,  there  would  be  modes  of  governing 
this  country  without  any  responsibility  to  Congress, 
and  the  "  cabinet,"  as  such,  would  come  to  have 
recognized  functions  as  a  body  for  registering  and 
publishing  the  rescripts  of  the  President.  It  was 
a  thoroughly  consistent  extension  of  the  same  doc- 
trine that  Jackson,  in  his  reply,  in  which  he  refused 
*  46  NUes,  180.  2  45  Niles,  247. 


CENSURE  OF  JACKSON  363 

to  comply  with  the  call  of  the  Senate,  professed 
his  responsibility  to  the  American  people,  and  his 
willingness  to  explain  to  them  the  grounds  of 
his  conduct.  Such  a  profession  was  an  insult  to 
the  constitutional  organ  of  the  mind  and  will  of  the 
American  people  worthy  of  a  military  autocrat, 
and  although  it  might  have  a  jingle  which  would 
tickle  the  ears  of  men  miseducated  by  the  catch- 
words of  democracy,  nevertheless  a  people  which 
would  accept  it  as  a  proper  and  lawful  expres- 
sion from  their  executive  chief  would  not  yet 
have  learned  the  alphabet  of  constitutional  govern- 
ment. 

In  January,  1834,  Jackson  sent  in  a  message 
complaining  that  the  Bank  still  kept  the  books, 
papers,  and  funds  belonging  to  the  pension  agency 
with  which  it  had  hitherto  been  charged.  The 
Senate  voted,  May  26th,  26  to  17,  that  the  Secre- 
tary of  War  had  no  authority  to  remove  the 
pension  funds  from  the  Bank. 

Clay  introduced  resolutions  which  finally  took 
this  shape :  "  Kesolved,  (1)  That  the  President,  in 
the  late  executive  proceedings  in  relation  to  the 
public  revenue,  has  assumed  upon  himself  authority 
and  power  not  conferred  by  the  Constitution  and 
the  laws,  but  in  derogation  of  both.  (2)  That 
the  reasons  assigned  by  the  Secretary  for  the  re- 
moval are  unsatisfactory  and  insufficient."  Benton 
offered  a  resolution  that  Biddle  should  be  called  to 
the  bar  of  the  Senate  to  give  the  reasons  for  the 
recent  curtailments  of  the  Bank,  and  to  answer 


364  ANDREW  JACKSON 

for  the  use  of  its  funds  for  electioneering.1  Feb- 
ruary 5,  1834,  Webster  reported  from  the  Com- 
mittee on  Finance  in  regard  to  the  removal  of  the 
deposits.  Clay's  second  resolution  was  at  once 
adopted,  28  to  18.  March  28th  the  first  resolution 
was  adopted,  26  to  20.  April  15th,  Jackson  sent 
in  a  protest  against  the  latter  resolution.  The 
Senate  refused  to  receive  it,  27  to  16,  declaring  it 
a  breach  of  privilege.  The  main  points  in  the 
protest  were  that  the  President  meant  to  maintain 
intact  the  rights  of  the  Executive,  and  that  the 
Senate  would  be  the  judges  in  case  of  impeach- 
ment, but  for  that  reason  ought  not  to  express  an 
opinion  until  the  House  saw  fit  to  impeach.  The 
Bank  charter  provided  that  the  Secretary  should 
report  his  reasons  to  Congress.  On  the  doctrine  of 
the  protest,  however,  one  House  of  Congress  could 
adopt  no  expression  of  opinion  on  the  report  sub- 
mitted, because  it  must  wait  for  the  other.  The  ad- 
ministration press  kept  up  truculent  denunciations 
of  the  Senate  all  winter.  The  "  Pennsylvanian  " 
said :  "  The  democrats  never  heartily  sanctioned  it, 
and  now,  having  the  power,  should  amend  or  get 
rid  of  it  once  and  forever." 2  The  New  York 
"  Standard  "  called  the  senators  "  usurpers."  3 

The  debates  of  the  winter  were  acrimonious  in 
the  extreme.  Probably  no  session  of  Congress  be- 
fore 1860-61  was  marked  by  such  fierce  contention 
in  Congress  and  such  excitement  out-of-doors. 
Chevalier,  who  was  an  acute  and  unprejudiced 
1  45  Niles,  332.  e  46  Niles,  131.  8  Ibid.  147. 


EXCITEMENT  AND   DECLAMATION        365 

observer,  said  that  the  speeches  of  the  administra- 
tion men  resembled  the  French  republican  tirades 
of  1791-92.  They  had  the  same  distinguishing 
trait, — emphasis.  "Most  generally  the  pictures 
presented  in  these  declamations  are  fantastical  de- 
lineations of  the  moneyed  aristocracy  overrunning 
the  country,  with  seduction,  corruption,  and  slavery 
in  its  train,  or  of  Mr.  Biddle  aiming  at  the  crown."  l 
The  chief  weapon  of  debate  was  emphasis  instead 
of  fact  and  reason.  With  an  "  old  hero  "  to  sup- 
port and  the  "  money  power  "  to  assail,  the  politi- 
cians and  orators  of  the  emphatic  school  had  a 
grand  opportunity.  There  is  also  an  unf ormulated 
dogma,  which  seems  to  command  a  great  deal  of 
faith,  to  this  effect,  that,  if  a  man  is  only  suffi- 
ciently ignorant,  his  whims  and  notions  constitute 
"  plain  common  sense."  There  are  no  questions 
on  which  this  dogma  acts  more  perniciously  than  on 
questions  of  banking  and  currency.  Wild  and 
whimsical  notions  about  these  topics,  propounded 
with  vehemence  and  obstinacy  in  Congress,  helped 
to  increase  the  alarm  out-of-doors. 

Senators  Bibb,  of  Kentucky,  and  White,  of  Ten-* 
nessee,  went  into  opposition.  Calhoun,  also,  for 
the  time,  allied  himself  heartily  with  the  opposi- 
tion. 

The  Virginia  Legislature  passed  resolutions  con- 
demning the  dismissal  of  Duane  and  the  removal 
of  the  deposits.  In  pursuance  of  the  dogmas  of 
Virginia  democracy,  Rives,  senator  from  that 

l  Chevalier,  61. 


366  ANDREW  JACKSON 

State,  and  supporter  of  the  administration  mea- 
sures, resigned.  B.  W.  Leigh  was  elected  in  his 
place. 

As  soon  as  the  resolution  of  censure  was  passed, 
Benton  gave  notice  of  a  motion  to  expunge  the 
same  from  the  records.  He  introduced  such  a  re- 
solution at  the  next  session,  and  the  Jackson  party 
was  more  firmly  consolidated  than  ever  before  in 
the  determination  to  carry  it.  The  personal  ele- 
ment was  present  in  that  enterprise,  with  the  desire 
for  revenge,  and  the  wish  to  demonstrate  loyalty. 
March  3, 1835,  the  words  "  ordered  to  be  expunged  " 
were  stricken  from  Benton's  resolution,  39  to  7, 
and  the  resolution  was  tabled,  27  to  20.  The 
agitation  was  then  carried  back  into  the  State  elec- 
tions, and  "  expunging  "  came  to  be  a  test  of  party 
fealty.  Benton  renewed  the  motion  December  26, 
1836.  The  Legislature  of  Virginia  adopted  in- 
structions in  favor  of  it.  John  Tyler  would  not 
vote  for  it,  and  resigned.  Leigh  would  not  do  so, 
and  would  not  resign.  He  never  recovered  party 
standing.1  Rives  was  sent  back  in  Tyler's  place. 
This  martyrdom,  and  Tyler's  report  on  the  Bank, 
mentioned  below,  made  Tyler  Vice  -  President.2 
The  vice  of  the  doctrine  of  instructions  was  well 
illustrated  in  these  proceedings.  If  the  Virginia 
doctrine  were  admitted,  senators  would  be  elected, 
not  for  six  years,  but  until  the  politics  of  the  State 
represented  might  change.  The  senator  would 
uot  be  a  true  representative,  under  the  theory  of 
k  *  See  his  letter  of  reply :  50  Niles,  28.  2  Wise,  158. 


EXPUNGING  AND   INSTRUCTIONS         367 

representative  institutions,  but  a  delegate,  or  am- 
bassador. It  would  be  another  victory  of  pure 
democracy  over  constitutional  institutions. 

The  administration  had  a  majority  in  the  Senate 
in  1836,  but  Benton  says  that  a  caucus  was  held 
on  expunging.  The  resolution  was  passed,  24  to 
19,  that  black  lines  should  be  drawn  around  the 
record  on  the  journal  of  the  Senate,  and  that  the 
words  "  expunged,  by  order  of  the  Senate,  this 
16th  day  of  January,  1837,"  should  be  written 
across  it.  It  was  a  great  personal  victory  for 
Jackson.  The  Senate  had  risen  up  to  condemn 
him  for  something  which  he  had  seen  fit  to  do,  and 
he  had  successfully  resented  and  silenced  its  re- 
proof. It  gratified  him  more  than  any  other  inci- 
dent of  the  latter  part  of  his  life.  It  was  still 
another  step  forward  in  the  development  of  his 
political  methods,  according  to  which  his  person- 
ality came  more  and  more  into  play  as  a  political 
force,  and  the  constitutional  institutions  of  the 
country  were  set  aside.  The  day  after  the  reso- 
lution was  expunged,  leave  was  refused,  in  the 
House,  to  bring  in  a  resolution  that  it  is  unconsti- 
tutional to  expunge  any  part  of  any  record  of 
either  House.1 

1  There  was  a  case  of  expunging  in  Jefferson's  time.  A  reso- 
lution which  had  been  passed  contained  a  statement  that  certain 
filibusters  thought  that  they  had  executive  sanction.  This  was 
expunged.  1  Adams,  439.  A  case  is  mentioned  in  Massachu- 
setts. Quincy's  resolution  against  rejoicing  in  naval  victories  was 
expunged.  Ingersoll,  23.  For  a  discussion  of  other  precedents 
see  the  speeches  of  Rives  and  Leigh.  50  Niles,  168,  173. 


368  ANDREW  JACKSON 

March  4,  1834,  Polk  reported  from  the  Commit- 
tee on  Ways  and  Means  on  the  removal  of  the 
deposits,  supporting  Jackson  and  Taney  in  all 
their  positions.  He  offered  four  resolutions,  which 
were  passed,  April  4th,  as  follows:  (1)  that  the 
Bank  ought  not  to  be  rechartered,  132  to  82 ;  (2) 
that  the  deposits  ought  not  to  be  restored,  118  to 
103 ;  (3)  that  the  local  banks  ought  to  be  deposi- 
tories of  the  public  funds,  117  to  105  ;  (4)  that  a 
select  committee  should  be  raised  on  the  Bank  and 
the  commercial  crisis,  171  to  42.  The  committee 
last  mentioned  reported  May  22d.a  The  majority 
said  that  the  Bank  had  resisted  all  their  attempts 
to  investigate.  They  proposed  that  the  directors 
should  be  arrested  and  brought  to  the  bar  of  the 
House.  The  position  of  the  Bank  seemed  to  be, 
at  this  time,  that  since  the  Bank  charter  was  to 
expire,  and  the  deposits  had  been  withdrawn,  any 
further  investigations  were  only  vexatious.  The 
minority  of  the  committee  (Edward  Everett  and 
W.  W.  Ellsworth)  reported  that  the  committee 
had  made  improper  demands,  and  that  the  instruc- 
tion given  to  the  committee  to  examine  the  Bank 
in  regard  to  the  commercial  crisis  was  based  on 
improper  assumptions.  The  Senate,  June  30th, 
instructed  the  Committee  on  Finance  to  make 
another  investigation  of  all  the  allegations  against 
the  Bank  made  by  Jackson  and  Taney  in  justifi- 
cation of  the  removal.  That  committee  reported 
December  18,  1834,  by  John  Tyler.2  The  report 
*  46  NUes,  221,  225.  *  Document  1. 


REPORTS   OF   1834  369 

goes  over  all  the  points,  with  conclusions  favorable 
to  the  Bank  on  each.  The  time  was  long  gone  by, 
however,  when  anybody  cared  for  reports. 

The  excitement  about  the  removal  of  the  depo- 
sits was  greatly  exaggerated.  The  public  was 
thrown  into  a  panic,  because  it  did  not  quite  see 
what  the  effect  would  be.  It  is  untrue  that  the 
Bank  made  a  panic,  and  it  is  untrue  to  say  that 
there  was  no  real  crisis.  The  statistics  of  loans, 
etc.,  which  the  hostile  committees  were  fond  of 
gathering,  proved  nothing,  because  they  proved 
anything.  If  the  Bank  loans  increased,  the  Bank 
was  extending  its  loans  to  curry  favor.  If  they 
decreased,  the  Bank  was  punishing  the  public,  and 
making  a  panic.  As  bank  loans  always  fluctuate, 
the  argument  never  slackened.  The  figures  ap- 
pended to  Tyler's  report  cover  the  whole  history  of 
the  Bank.  There  are  no  fluctuations  there  which 
can  be  attributed  to  malicious  action  by  the  Bank. 
The  root  of  all  the  wrong-doing  of  the  Bank,  out 
of  which  sprang  nearly  all  the  charges  which  were 
in  any  measure  just,  was  in  the  branch  drafts  and 
the  bad  banking  in  the  West.  The  loans  increased 
up  to  May,  1832,  when  they  were  $70,400,000. 
The  increase,  so  far  as  it  was  remarkable,  was  in  the 
western  branches.  The  operation  of  the  "  racers  " 
is  also  distinctly  traceable  in  the  accounts  of  the 
parent  bank  and  some  of  the  branches.  The  effect 
of  the  general  restraint  imposed  can  also  be  seen, 
and  the  movement  can  be  traced  by  which  the 
Bank,  drawing  back  from  the  perilous  position 


370  ANDREW  JACKSON 

into  which  it  was  drifting  in  1832,  got  its  branches 
into  better  condition,  and  improved  its  whole  status 
from  October,  1832,  to  October,  1833.  It  was 
this  course  which  afforded  all  the  grounds  there 
were  for  the  charge  of  panic-making. 

The  Bank  was  very  strong  when  the  deposits 
were  removed.  The  loans  were  $42,200,000; 
domestic  exchange,  $17,800,000  ;  foreign  ex- 
change, 2,300,000  ;  specie,  $10,600,000  ;  due  from 
local  banks,  $2,200,000;  notes  of  local  banks, 
$62,400,000  ;  public  deposits,  $9,000,000  ;  private 
deposits,  $8,000,000  ;  circulation,  $19,100,000.  It 
also  held  real  estate  worth  $3,000,000.  During 
the  winter  of  1833-34  there  was  a  stringent  money 
market  and  commercial  distress.  The  local  banks 
were  in  no  condition  to  take  the  public  deposits. 
They  were  trying  to  strengthen  themselves,  and 
to  put  themselves  on  the  level  of  the  Treasury 
requirements  in  the  hope  of  getting  a  share  of  the 
deposits.  It  was  they  who  operated  a  bank  con- 
traction during  that  winter.  It  was  six  months, 
and  then  only  by  the  favor  and  concession  of  the 
Treasury,  before  the  local  banks,  "  pet  banks  "  as 
they  soon  came  to  be  called,  could  get  into  a 
position  to  take  the  place  of  the  Bank  of  the 
United  States.  This  was  the  "  chaos  "  into  which 
Duane,  like  an  honest  man,  and  man  of  sense,  had 
refused  to  plunge  the  fiscal  interests  of  the  country. 
The  administration,  however,  charged  everything 
to  Biddle  and  the  Bank.  Petitions  were  sent  to 
Congress.  Benton  and  the  others  said  that  there 


COMMERCIAL  CRISIS  371 

was  no  crisis,  and  that  the  petitions  were  gotten 
up  for  effect,  to  frighten  Jackson  into  restoring 
the  deposits.  The  proofs  of  the  genuineness  and 
severity  of  the  crisis,  in  the  forty-fifth  volume  of 
Niles's  "  Kegister,"  are  ample.  In  January,  1834, 
exchange  on  England  was  at  one  hundred  and  one 
and  a  half  (par  one  hundred  and  seven)  ;  capital 
was  loaning  at  from  one  and  a  half  per  cent  to 
three  per  cent  per  month ;  bank-notes  were  quoted 
at  varying  rates  of  discount.1  Delegations  went 
to  Washington  to  represent  to  Jackson  the  state 
of  the  country.  He  became  violent ;  told  the  dele- 
gations to  go  to  Biddle  ;  that  he  had  all  the  money ; 
that  the  Bank  was  a  "  monster,"  to  which  all  the 
trouble  was  due.  In  answer  to  a  delegation  from 
Philadelphia,  February  11, 1834,  Jackson  sketched 
out  the  bullionist  program,  which  the  administra- 
tion pursued  from  this  time  forth  as  an  offset  to 
the  complaints  about  the  removal  of  the  deposits.2 
Up  to  this  time  it  had  been  supposed  that  Jackson 
rather  leaned  to  paper-money  notions.  He  now 
proposed,  as  an  "experiment"  (so  he  called  it),  to 
induce  the  banks,  by  promising  them  a  share  in 
the  deposits,  to  give  up  the  use  of  notes  under 
15.00,  later  to  do  away  with  all  under  $10.00,  and 
finally  to  restrict  bank-notes  to  $20.00  and  up- 
wards, so  as  to  bring  about  a  circulation  of  which 

1  46  Niles,  133. 

2  Taney  made  the  first  official  statement  of   the  plan  of  the 
administration  in  a  letter  to  the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means, 
April  15,  1834. 


372  ANDREW  JACKSON 

a  reasonable  part  should  be  specie.  Jackson's 
personal  interest  had  been  enlisted  in  this  scheme. 
He  wrote  to  Lewis,  while  on  a  journey  to  Tennes- 
see, July  15,  1834:  "supper  is  announced  and  I 
am  hungry  —  but  I  cannot  forego  saying  to  you 
that  all  things  appear  well  in  Virginia  —  the  Gold 
bill  &  a  Specie  currency  are  doing  wonders  — 
The  notion  was  good  as  far  as  it  went,  but  had 
precisely  the  fault  of  a  good  financial  notion  in  the 
hands  of  incompetent  men  ;  the  scheme  did  not 
take  into  account  all  the  consequences  of  distribut- 
ing the  deposits  as  proposed.  It  persuaded  the 
banks  to  conform  to  external  rules  about  circula- 
tion, but,  under  the  circumstances,  these  rules  did 
not  have  the  force  they  were  supposed  to  have, 
and  the  bank  loans  were  stimulated  to  an  enormous 
inflation,  which  threw  the  whole  business  of  the 
country  into  a  fever,  and  then  produced  a  great 
commercial  crisis.  For  a  short  period,  in  the  sum- 
mer of  1834,  the  currency  was  in  a  very  sound 
condition.  The  Bank  of  the  United  States  was, 
by  the  necessity  of  its  position,  under  strong  pre- 
cautions. The  local  banks,  by  their  efforts  to 
meet  the  Treasury  requirements,  were  stronger 
than  ever  before.  The  popular  sentiment,  however, 
had  now  swung  over  again  to  the  mania  for  banks. 
Each  district  wanted  a  deposit  bank,  so  as  to  get 
a  share  in  the  stream  of  wealth  from  the  public 
treasury.  If  a  deposit  could  not  be  obtained, 
then  the  bank  was  formed  in  order  to  participate 

i  Ford  MSS. 


MANIA  FOR  BANKS  373 

in  the  carnival  of  credit  and  speculation,  for  a 
non-deposit  bank  could  manage  its  affairs  as  reck- 
lessly as  it  chose.  The  deposit  banks  speedily 
drew  together  to  try  to  prevent  any  more  from 
being  admitted  to  share  in  the  public  deposits. 
The  mania  for  banking  was  such  that  formal  riots 
occurred  at  the  subscription  to  the  stock  of  new 
banks.1  The  favored  few,  who  could  subscribe 
the  whole,  sold  to  the  rest  at  an  advance.  To  be 
a  commissioner  was  worth  from  $500  to  $  1,000.2 
There  was  a  notion,  borrowed  perhaps  from  the 
proceedings  of  the  government  of  the  United 
States  in  the  organization  of  both  national  banks, 
that  to  make  a  bank  was  a  resource  by  which  a 
group  of  insolvent  debtors  could  extricate  them- 
selves from  their  embarrassments.  The  Tammany 
society  being  in  debt,  a  plan  was  formed  for  paying 
the  debt  by  making  a  bank.3  When  the  great  fire 
occurred  in  New  York,  December,  1835,  a  proposi- 
tion was  made  to  create  a  bank,  as  a  mode  of 
relieving  the  sufferers.  "  To  make  a  bank,"  said 
Niles,  "  is  the  great  panacea  for  every  ill  that  can 
befall  the  people  of  the  United  States,  and  yet  it 
adds  not  one  cent  to  the  capital  of  the  commu- 
nity." 4  The  effect  of  this  multiplication  of  banks, 
and  of  the  scramble  between  them  for  the  public 
deposits,  was  that  an  enormous  amount  of  capi- 
tal was  arbitrarily  distributed  over  the  country, 

1  42  Niles,  257 ;  44  Niles,  371.    See  some  of  these  facts  and 
the  use  made  of  them  in  Brothers's  United  States,  p.  51. 

2  46  Niles,  188.  3  Mackeinzie,  70.  *  49  Niles,  298. 


374  ANDREW  JACKSON 

according  to  political  favoritism  and  local  influ- 
ence, and  in  entire  disregard  of  the  industrial 
and  commercial  conditions.  The  public  debt  was 
all  paid  January  1,  1835.  After  that  date  the 
public  deposits  increased  with  great  rapidity,  and 
there  was  no  occasion  to  spend  them.  The  state  of 
things  was  therefore  this:  an  immense  amount 
of  capital  was  being  collected  by  taxes,  and  then 
distributed  to  favored  corporations,  as  a  free  loan 
for  an  indefinite  period,  on  which  they  could  earn 
profits  by  lending- it  at  interest.  No  monster  bank, 
under  the  most  malicious  management,  could  have 
produced  as  much  harm,  either  political  or  finan- 
cial, as  this  system  produced  while  it  lasted. 

November  5,  1834,  Secretary  Woodbury  in- 
formed the  Bank  of  the  United  States  that  the 
Treasury  would  not  receive  branch  drafts  after 
January  1,  1835.  This  led  to  a  spirited  corre- 
spondence with  Biddle,  in  which  the  latter  defended 
the  drafts  as  good,  both  in  law  and  finance.1  In 
the  message  of  1834  Jackson  recapitulated  the  old 
complaints  against  the  Bank,  and  recommended 
that,  on  account  of  its  "  high-handed  proceedings," 
its  notes  should  no  longer  be  received  by  the  Trea- 
sury, and  that  the  stock  owned  by  the  nation  should 
be  sold.  The  session  of  1834-35  was,  however, 
fruitless  as  to  banking  and  currency.  January 
12,  1835,  on  Benton's  motion,  the  Committee  on 
Finance  was  ordered  to  investigate  the  specie 
transactions  of  the  Bank.  Tyler  took  fire  at  this, 

1  Document  J. 


REVIEW  OF  THE  BANK  WAR  375 

because  it  reflected  on  the  report  which  he  had 
just  made.  In  view  of  subsequent  history,  it  is 
worth  while  to  notice  the  profession  of  faith  which 
was  drawn  from  Tyler  at  this  time.  He  said  that 
he  was  opposed  to  any  national  bank  on  constitu- 
tional grounds,  but  that  he  was  free  from  Jack- 
sonism,  and  that  he  wanted  to  be  just  to  the  exist- 
ing Bank.  January  10th  Polk  introduced  a  bill 
to  forbid  the  receipt  of  notes  of  the  Bank  of  the 
United  States  at  the  Treasury,  unless  the  Bank 
would  pay  at  once  the  dividend  which  had  been 
withheld  in  1834.  Bills  were  also  proposed  for 
regulating  the  deposits  in  the  deposit  banks.  No 
action  resulted. 

In  the  message  of  1835  Jackson  referred  to  the 
war  which  (as  he  said)  the  Bank  had  waged  on 
the  government  for  four  years,  as  a  proof  of  the 
evil  effects  of  such  an  institution.  He  declared 
that  the  Bank  belonged  to  a  system  of  distrust  of 
the  popular  will  as  a  regulator  of  political  power, 
and  to  a  policy  which  would  supplant  our  system  by 
a  consolidated  government.^  Here,  then,  at  the  end 
of  the  Bank  war,  we  meet  again  with  the  second 
of  the  theories  of  the  Bank  which  Ingham  formu- 
lated in  his  letter  to  Biddle  of  October  5,  1829,1  at 
the  beginning  of  the  Bank  war.  Ingham  said  that 
some  people  held  that  theory.  The  assumption 
that  the  Bank  held  that  theory  concerning  itself 
had  been  made  the  rule  of  action  of  the  govern- 
ment, and  the  laws  and  administration  of  the  coun- 

1  See  page  276. 


376  ANDREW  JACKSON 

try  had  been  made  to  conform  to  that  assumption 
as  an  established  fact.  At  the  session  of  1835-36 
an  attempt  was  made  to  investigate  the  transac- 
tions of  members  of  Congress  with  the  Bank.  It 
was  abandoned  when  Adams  declared  that  a  simi- 
lar attempt  in  1832  had  been  abandoned,  because 
it  cut  both  ways. 


CHAPTER  XI 

SPECULATION,  DISTRIBUTION,  CURRENCY  LEGISLA- 
TION, AND  END  OF  THE  BANK  OF  THE  UNITED 
STATES 

Speculation  and  Inflation.  —  In  the  spring  of 
1835  the  phenomena  of  a  period  of  speculation 
began  to  be  distinctly  marked.  There  was  great 
monetary  ease  and  prosperity  in  England  and 
France,  as  well  as  here.  Some  important  im- 
provements in  machinery,  the  first  railroads, 
greater  political  satisfaction  and  security,  and 
joint  stock  banks  were  especially  favorable  ele- 
ments which  were  then  affecting  France  and 
England.  The  price  of  cotton  advanced  sharply 
during  1834-35.  Speculation  seized  upon  cotton 
lands  in  Mississippi  and  Louisiana,  and  on  negroes. 
Next  it  affected  real  estate  in  the  cities  at  which 
cotton  was  handled  commercially.  The  success  of 
the  Erie  Canal  led  to  numerous  enterprises  of  a 
like  nature  in  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  Ohio,  In- 
diana, and  Illinois.  Capital  for  these  enterprises 
was  not  at  hand.  The  States  endeavored  to  draw 
the  capital  from  Europe  by  the  use  of  their  credit. 
The  natural  consequence  was  great  recklessness  in 
contracting  debt,  and  much  "  financiering "  by 


378  ANDREW  JACKSON 

agents  and  middle-men.  The  abundant  and  cheap 
capital,  here  and  abroad,  of  1835-36  favored  all 
the  improvement  enterprises.  These  enterprises 
were,  however,  in  their  nature,  investments,  returns 
from  which  could  not  be  expected  for  a  long 
period.  In  the  mean  time,  they  locked  up  capital. 
It  appears  that  labor  and  capital  were  withdrawn 
for  a  time  from  agriculture,  and  devoted  to  means 
of  transportation.  Wheat  and  flour  were  im- 
ported in  1836.1  The  land  of  the  Western  States 
had  greatly  risen  in  value  since  the  Erie  Canal 
had  been  open.  Speculation  in  this  land  became 
very  active.  Timber  lands  in  Maine  were  another 
mania.2  The  loans  of  capital  from  Europe  in- 
creased month  by  month.  The  entire  payment  of 
the  public  debt  of  the  United  States  had  a  great 
effect  upon  the  imagination  of  people  in  Europe. 
It  raised  the  credit  of  the  United  States.  It  was 
thought  that  a  country  which  could  pay  off  its 
debt  with  such  rapidity  must  be  a  good  country 
in  which  to  invest  capital.  The  credit  extended 
to  the  United  States  depressed  the  exchanges,  and 
gave  an  unusual  protection  to  the  excessive  bank- 
note issues  in  the  United  States.  Those  issues 
sustained  and  stimulated  the  excessive  credit  which 
the  public  deposits  were  bringing  into  existence. 
The  banks  had  an  arbitrary  rule  that  a  reserve  of 
specie  to  the  amount  of  one  third  of  the  circulation 
would  secure  them  beyond  any  danger.  So  long 
as  the  exchanges  were  depressed  by  the  exportation 
*  50  Niles,  50,  74 ;  51  Niles,  17.  2  48  Niles,  167. 


SPECULATION,  1835-36  379 

of  capital  from  Europe  to  America,  no  shipment  of 
specie  occurred,  and  the  system  was  not  tested. 
All  prices  were  rising  ;  all  was  active  and  hopeful ; 
debt  was  the  road  to  wealth.  If  one  could  ob- 
tain capital  for  margins,  and  speculate  on  differ- 
ences in  stocks,  commodities,  and  real  estate,  he 
had  a  chance  to  win  enormous  profits  while  the 
credit  system  went  on.  Large  classes  of  persons 
were  drawn  to  city  occupations,  exchange,  banking, 
and  brokerage,  because  these  industries  were  most 
profitable.  Cities  grew,  rents  advanced,  real  estate 
rose  in  value.  Down  to  October  1,  1836,  the  fol- 
lowing States  had  forbidden  notes  under  $5.00 : 
New  York,  Pennsylvania,  Virginia,  Georgia,  Lou- 
isiana, Indiana,  Alabama,  New  Jersey,  Maryland, 
North  Carolina,  Tennessee,  Kentucky,  and  Maine. 
It  appears,  however,  that  small  notes  of  earlier 
issue  were  still  in  circulation,  and  the  state  of 
things  which  the  legislation  meant  to  bring  about 
never  was  reached,  so  far  as  one  can  now  learn. 

In  the  autumn  of  1835,  the  money  market  be- 
came more  stringent.  This  fact  was  charged  to 
the  pet  banks  and  to  fears  of  trouble  with  France.1 
The  pet  banks  had  every  interest  to  arrest  inflation. 
If  they  were  held  to  conservative  rules,  while  the 
non-deposit  banks  about  them  were  not  so  held, 
the  former  only  left  free  room  for  the  latter,  and 
then  the  former  had  to  receive  the  notes  of  the 
latter.  In  January,  1836,  the  rate  of  discount  at 
Philadelphia  was  two  per  cent  per  month.2  Banks 
1  49  Niles,  225,  281.  2  49  NiieS,  313. 


380  ANDREW  JACKSON 

were  still  being  multiplied.1  During  1836  prices 
continued  to  rise,  speculation  was  active,  rates  for 
capital  increased;  there  was  complaint  of  a  scar- 
city of  money,  and  a  demand  for  more  banks. 
Governor  Marcy,  of  New  York,  in  his  message 
for  1836,  pointed  out  the  "unregulated  spirit  of 
speculation  "  which  prevailed,  and  he  warned  the 
Legislature  against  the  fallacies  involved  in  the 
demand  for  more  banks.2  In  April  the  best  com- 
mercial paper  was  quoted,  at  New  York,  at  thirty 
per  cent  to  forty  per  cent  per  annum ;  second  rate, 
at  one  half  of  one  per  cent  per  day.3  At  Boston 
the  rate  was  one  per  cent  per  month.  Exchange 
on  England,  at  New  York,  was  one  hundred  and 
five  (par  one  hundred  and  nine  and  three  fifths), 
showing  the  current  of  capital  in  spite  of  the  in- 
flation. In  May  Niles  said,  "  There  is  an  awful 
pressure  for  money  in  most  of  the  cities,"  4  yet  he 
also  describes  the  unprecedented  activity  of  busi- 
ness in  Baltimore. 

Land  and  Distribution.  —  In  the  first  message 
after  his  reelection,  in  1832,  Jackson  proposed,  in 
regard  to  the  public  lands,  that  they  should  be 
sold  to  the  new  States  and  to  actual  settlers  at  a 
very  low  price.  December  12th  of  that  year  Clay 
reintroduced  his  land  bill.5  He  succeeded  in  get- 
ting it  passed,  but  it  was  sent  to  the  President 
within  ten  days  of  the  end  of  the  session.  Jackson 

i  49  Niles,  435.  2  2  Hammond,  449. 

8  Evening  Post,  in  50  Niles,  134.          *  50  Niles,  185. 
6  See  page  234. 


LAND   DISTRIBUTION  381 

did  not  sign  it.  In  December,  1833,  he  sent  in  a 
message  stating  his  reasons  for  not  doing  so.  He 
objected  especially  to  the  policy  of  giving  away 
the  proceeds  of  the  lands  while  levying  heavy 
duties  on  imports.  The  session  of  1833—34  was 
fully  occupied  with  the  Bank  question  and  the 
removal  of  the  deposits.  At  the  session  of  1834—35 
Clay  again  brought  in  a  land  bill,  but  no  action 
was  taken.  Relations  with  France  occupied  the 
attention  of  Congress  during  that  session,  which 
was  a  short  one.  At  the  session  of  1835-36  Clay 
introduced  a  bill  to  distribute  the  net  proceeds  of 
the  lands,  after  taking  out  ten  per  cent  for  the  ten 
new  States.  Calhoun  introduced  a  joint  resolution 
to  amend  the  Constitution  so  that  the  surplus 
revenue  could  be  distributed  among  the  States. 
He  also  introduced  a  bill  to  regulate  the  public 
deposits.  A  bill  to  distribute  the  surplus  revenue 
was  also  introduced.  The  land  bill  passed  the 
Senate  May  4,  1836,  by  25  to  20.  It  was  tabled 
in  the  House,  104  to  85,  June  22d.  The  distribu- 
tion bill  and  the  deposit  bill  were  consolidated 
into  one,  and  passed  by  the  Senate  June  17th,  38 
to  6.  On  the  20th  of  June,  in  the  House,  an  effort 
was  made  to  divide  the  bill,  so  as  to  separate  the 
regulation  of  the  deposits  from  the  distribution, 
but  the  effort  failed.  The  House  then  changed 
the  plan  of  distributing  the  surplus  to  the  States 
as  a  gift,  into  a  plan  for  "depositing"  it  with 
them  subject  to  recall.  In  this  shape  the  bill 
passed,  155  to  38,  and  became  a  law  by  the  concur- 
rence of  the  Senate  and  the  President. 


382  ANDREW  JACKSON 

The  "  Globe  " l  said  that  Jackson  would  have 
vetoed  the  bill  as  it  came  from  the  Senate.  He 
thought  that  the  plan  of  "  depositing  "  the  surplus 
was  free  from  constitutional  objections,  but  the 
"  Globe  "  gave  notice  to  all  whom  it  might  concern 
that  the  President  would  not  sign  any  bill  the  effect 
of  which  would  be  to  raise  revenue  by  federal  taxa- 
tion, and  distribute  the  proceeds  among  the  States. 
The  distribution  measure  was  one  of  those  errors 
which  are  apt  to  be  committed  on  the  eve  of  a 
presidential  election,  when  politicians  do  not  dare 
to  oppose  measures  which  gratify  class  or  local 
feelings  or  interests.  Webster  opposed  distribu- 
tion, unless  the  land  income  could  be  separated. 
He  said  that  taxes  must  be  reduced  even  at  the 
risk  of  injuring  some  industries.2  It  was  provided 
in  the  bill  that  there  should  be  in  each  State  a 
deposit  bank,  if  a  bank  could  be  found  which  would 
fulfil  the  prescribed  conditions.  Each  of  these 
banks  was  to  redeem  all  its  notes  in  specie,  and  to 
issue  no  notes  for  less  than  $5.00  after  July  4, 
1836.  The  Treasury  was  not  to  receive,  after  that 
date,  the  notes  of  any  bank  which  did  issue  notes 
under  $5.00.  It  was  to  pay  out  no  note  under 
$10.00  after  the  passage  of  the  act,  and  no  note 
under  $20.00  after  March  3,  1837.  If  the  public 
deposits  in  any  bank  should  exceed  one  fourth  of 
the  capital  of  the  bank,  it  was  to  pay  two  per  cent 
interest  on  the  excess.  No  transfer  of  deposits 
from  bank  to  bank  was  to  be  made  by  the  Secre- 
1  50  Niles,  281.  2  1  Curtis's  Webster,  537. 


THE  DEPOSIT  AND   DISTRIBUTION  ACT    383 

tary,  except  when  and  because  the  convenience  of 
the  Treasury  required  it.  In  that  case,  he  was  to 
transfer  from  one  deposit  bank  to  the  next  deposit 
bank  in  the  neighborhood,  and  so  on  ;  i.  e.,  not 
from  one  end  of  the  country  to  the  other.  As  to 
distribution,  the  bill  provided  that  all  the  money 
in  the  Treasury,  January  1,  1837,  in  excess  of 
15,000,000,  was  to  be  deposited  with  the  States  in 
the  proportion  of  their  membership  in  the  electoral 
college,  and  in  four  instalments,  January,  April, 
July,  and  October,  1837.  The  States  were  to  give 
negotiable  certificates  of  deposit,  payable  to  the 
Secretary  or  his  assigns  on  demand.  If  the  Secre- 
tary should  negotiate  any  certificate,  it  should  bear 
five  per  cent  interest  from  the  date  of  assign- 
ment. While  not  assigned,  the  certificates  bore 
no  interest.1 

In  his  message  of  1836  Jackson  offered  a  long 
and  very  just  criticism  on  this  act.  His  objections 
were  so  pertinent  and  so  strong  that  we  are  forced 
to  believe  that  he  did  not  veto  only  on  account 
of  the  pending  election.  A  number  of  doubtful 
States  were  "  improvement  States  ;  "  that  is,  they 
had  plunged  recklessly  into  debt  for  canals,  etc., 
which  were  not  finished,  and  credit  was  declining 
while  the  money  market  was  growing  stringent. 
Those  States  were  very  eager  (or,  at  least,  many 
people  in  them  were)  to  get  the  money  in  the  fed- 
eral treasury  with  which  to  go  on  with  the  works. 
Jackson  argued  in  favor  of  the  reduction  and 
1  50  Niles,  290. 


384  ANDREW  JACKSON 

abolition  of  all  the  taxes  with  which  the  compro- 
mise tariff  allowed  Congress  to  deal,  and  he  exposed 
completely  the  silly  device  by  which  the  whigs 
tried  to  justify  distribution,  separating  the  revenue 
in  imagination,  and  pretending  to  distribute  the 
part  which  came  from  land.  Jackson  made  a  lame 
attempt  to  explain  the  recommendations  which  he 
had  made  in  his  early  messages  in  favor  of  distri- 
bution. He  gave  a  table  showing  the  effect  of 
distribution  according  to  the  ratio  of  membership 
in  the  electoral  college  as  compared  with  that  on 
the  ratio  of  federal  population.  The  small  and 
new  States  gained  enormously  by  the  plan  adopted. 
The  best  that  can  be  said  in  excuse  for  distribu- 
tion is  that  the  surplus  was  doing  so  much  mischief 
that  the  best  thing  to  do  with  it  was  to  throw 
it  away.  Unfortunately,  it  could  not  be  thrown 
away  without  doing  other  harm.  We  have  already 
noticed  the  shocks  given  to  the  money  market  by 
the  debt-paying  operation.1  The  removal  of  the 
deposits  took  place  before  that  was  completed,  and 
produced  a  new  complication.  The  credit  relations 
formerly  existing  towards  and  around  the  great 
Bank  were  rudely  cut  off,  and  left  to  reconstruct 
themselves  as  best  they  could.  As  soon  as  the 
new  state  of  things  had  become  a  little  established, 
there  was  an  accumulation  of  a  great  surplus,  nom- 
inally in  the  deposit  banks,  really  loaned  out  to 
individuals,  and  fully  engaged  in  speculative  im- 
portations with  credit  for  duties,  or  in  speculative 
1  See  page  315. 


THE  DEPOSIT  AND   DISTRIBUTION  ACT  *  385 

contracts,  payment  on  which  was  to  be  received  in 
State  bonds  and  scrip,  or  in  still  other  indescriba- 
ble repetitions  of  debt  and  contract.  The  capital, 
when  thus  fully  absorbed,  was  next  all  called  in 
again,  in  order  to  be  transferred  to  the  States.  The 
States  did  not  intend  to  loan  the  capital ;  they  in- 
tended to  spend  it  in  public  works ;  that  is,  for  the 
most  part,  considering  the  actual  facts  as  they  ex- 
isted, to  sink  it  entirely.  In  one  way  or  another 
these  funds  were  squandered  by  all  the  States,  or 
worse  than  squandered,  since  they  served  corrup- 
tion and  abuse.  In  1877  it  was  declared  that  the 
Comptroller  of  New  York  did  not  know  what  had 
become  of  the  deposit  fund  of  the  State.  For 
many  years  the  commissioners  of  only  nine  coun- 
ties had  made  any  report.  The  Comptroller  asked 
for  $15,000  with  which  to  find  out  what  had 
become  of  the  $4,000,000  which  was  the  share 
of  New  York.  The  fact  that  the  funds  were 
squandered  was  the  least  of  the  purely  financial 
evils  attendant  on  distribution.  The  effect  on 
all  the  relations  of  capital,  credit,  and  currency, 
that  is,  the  effect  on  every  man's  rights  and  inter- 
ests, was  the  most  far-reaching  and  serious  conse- 


quence.1 


On  the  1st  of  June,  1836,2  the  deposit  banks 
stood  thus:  capital,  146,400,000;  due  to  the 
Treasurer  of  the  United  States,  $37,200,000; 
due  to  public  officers,  $3,700,000;  circulation, 
$27,900,000;  other  deposits,  $16,000,000;  due 

1  Bourne,  Surplus  Revenue  of  1837.  2  50  Niles,  313. 


386  ANDREW  JACKSON 

to  other  banks,  117,100,000.  Contra:  loans, 
171,200,000  ;  domestic  exchange,  $37,100,000  ;  due 
from  banks,  117,800,000 ;  notes  of  other  banks, 
$10,900,000;  specie,  $10,400,000.  It  appears 
then  that  these  banks  owed  the  United  States 
$41,000,000,  while  their  whole  capital  was  only 
$46,000,000 ;  that  is  to  say,  the  public  deposits 
furnished  them  with  a  capital  nearly  equal  to  their 
own.  If  their  "other  deposits"  had  been  all  cash 
capital  deposited,  four  elevenths  of  all  their  loan- 
able funds  would  have  been  public  deposits,  which 
would  have  been  "  called  "  by  the  act  of  June  23, 
1836.  It  is  also  noticeable  what  a  large  sum  is 
due  to  and  from  other  banks.  The  feeling  that 
banks  ought  to  forbear  demands  on  each  other 
seems  to  have  been  an  outgrowth  of  the  war 
against  the  Bank  of  the  United  States.  The  con- 
sequence was  that  the  banks  were  all  locked  to- 
gether, and  when  the  trouble  came  they  all  went 
down  together. 

In  December,  1836,  Calhoun  introduced  another 
distribution  bill  to  distribute  any  surplus  which 
might  be  in  the  Treasury  on  January  1,  1838.  It 
was  finally  added  as  a  "  rider  "  to  an  appropriation 
bill,  providing  money  for  fortifications.  The  House 
passed  the  bill  and  rider,  but  the  Senate  rejected 
the  whole.  Clay  also  introduced  another  land  dis- 
tribution bill.  Schemes  of  distribution  were  great 
whig  measures  down  to  Tyler's  time. 

The  first  and  second  instalments  of  the  distri- 
bution of  1837  were  paid  in  specie,  in  January 


STATE  DEPOSIT  FUNDS  387 

and  April.  The  commercial  crisis  began  in  March. 
The  banks  suspended  in  May.  The  third  instal- 
ment was  paid  in  notes  in  July.  Before  August 
the  Treasury,  which  was  giving  away  $ 35,000,000, 
was  in  the  greatest  straits.  Van  Buren  was  forced 
to  call  an  extra  session  of  Congress.  That  body 
had  no  more  urgent  business  than  to  forbid  the 
Secretary  to  negotiate  any  of  his  "deposit"  cer- 
tificates, or  to  call  on  any  of  the  States  for  the 
money  deposited  with  them.  The  payment  of  the 
fourth  instalment  was  postponed  until  January  1, 
1839.  At  that  date  there  was  debt,  not  surplus, 
and  the  fourth  instalment  never  was  paid.  Con- 
gress has  never  recalled  any  part  of  the  other  three 
instalments.  Even  when  the  civil  war  broke  out, 
it  did  not  venture  to  do  this.  The  amount  of  the 
three  instalments,  $28,000,000,  stands  on  the  books 
as  unavailable  funds.  The  Secretary  of  the  Trea- 
sury was  obliged  to  draw  his  first  three  instalments 
where  he  could  get  them,  so  he  drew  them  from  the 
North  and  East,  the  banks  of  the  Southwest  being 
really  ruined.  The  fourth  instalment  remained 
due  from  the  banks  of  the  Southwestern  States. 
It  was  years  before  any  part  of  it  could  be  re- 
covered. The  Southwestern  States  participated  in 
the  distribution  of  the  three  instalments.1 

Specie  Currency.  —  Reference  has  been  made 
above2  to  the  plans  of  the  administration  for  a 
specie  currency,  as  a  complement  or  offset  to  the 
removal  of  the  deposits  and  destruction  of  the 

1  See  table,  53  Niles,  35.  2  See  page  371. 


388  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Bank.1  Benton,  who  was  the  strongest  bullionist 
in  the  administration  circle,  was  under  an  exag- 
gerated opinion  of  the  efficacy  of  a  metallic  cur- 
rency to  prevent  abuses  of  credit.  A  metallic 
currency  is  not  liable  to  certain  abuses,  and  it  re- 
quires no  skill  for  its  management.  In  contrast 
with  paper,  therefore,  it  is  surer  and  safer.  It, 
however,  offers  no  guarantees  against  bad  banking. 
At  most  it  could  relieve  the  non-capitalist  wage- 
receiver  from  any  direct  share  or  risk  in  bad  bank- 
ing. In  contending  against  plutocracy,  democracy 
ought  to  put  a  metallic  currency  high  up  on  its 
banner.  The  most  subtle  and  inexcusable  abuse  of 
the  public  which  has  ever  been  devised  is  that 
of  granting  to  corporations,  without  exacting  an 
equivalent,  the  privilege  of  taking  out  of  the  cir- 
culation the  value  currency,  for  which  the  public 
must  always  pay,  whether  they  get  it  or  not,  and 
putting  into  it  their  own  promises  to  pay.  The 
subtlety  of  this  device,  and  the  fallacies  which  clus- 
ter about  it  and  impose  upon  uneducated  people, 
are  a  full  justification  for  men  of  democratic  con- 
victions, if  they  say :  We  do  not  understand  it  well 
enough  to  control  it.  We  cannot  spend  time  and 
attention  to  watch  it.  We  will  not  allow  it  at  all. 
Such  confession  of  ignorance  and  abnegation  of 
power,  however,  is  hardly  in  the  spirit  of  demo- 
cracy. As  a  matter  of  history,  the  bullionist  ten- 
dencies of  a  section  of  the  Jacksonian  party  were 
at  war  with  other  parts  of  the  policy  of  the  same 
i  The  Globe  in  46  Niles,  331. 


BULLION  MARKET  389 

party,  notably  the  distribution  of  the  public  de- 
posits in  eighty  banks,  with  encouragement  to  loan 
freely. 

The  opposition  party,  on  the  other  hand,  took  up 
cudgels  in  behalf  of  banks  and  bank  paper,  as  if 
there  would  be  no  currency  if  bank  paper  were 
withdrawn,  and  as  if  there  would  be  no  credit  if 
there  were  no  banks  of  issue.  In  their  arguments 
against  the  bullionist  party,  they  talked  as  if  they 
believed  that,  if  the  public  Treasury  did  its  own 
business,  and  did  it  in  gold,  it  would  get  possession 
of  all  the  gold  in  the  country,  and  that  this  would 
give  it  control  of  all  the  credit  in  the  country, 
because  the  paper  issue  was  based  on  gold. 

In  1834  the  administration  was  determined  to 
have  a  gold  currency.  The  Committee  on  Ways 
and  Means  reported,  April  22,  1834,1  that  it  was 
useless  to  coin  gold  while  the  rating  remained  as  it 
was  fixed  by  the  laws  of  1792  and  1793.  The  coin- 
age law  had  often  been  discussed  before.  Lowndes 
studied  it  and  reported  on  it  in  1819 ;  J.  Q.  Adams 
in  1820.  In  1830  Sanford,  of  New  York,  proposed 
a  gold  currency  with  subsidiary  silver.  In  the  same 
year  Ingham  made  a  report,  recommending  the 
ratio  1 :  15.625.  In  1831  a  coinage  bill  passed  the 
Senate,  but  was  not  acted  on  in  the  House.  At 
the  session  of  1831-32  White  and  Verplanck,  of 
New  York,  wanted  silver  made  sole  money.  On 
account  of  the  difficulty  and  delicacy  of  the  sub- 
ject no  action  had  been  reached.  In  1834  a  new 
i  46  Niles,  159. 


390  ANDREW  JACKSON 

interest  came  in.  The  gold  product  of  the  South- 
ern Alleghanies  was  increasing.  In  1832  there 
came  to  the  mint  from  that  region  $678,000  value  of 
gold,  and  in  1833  $868,000.  There  was  a  protec- 
tionist movement  in  behalf  of  gold,  the  interest  of 
which  was  that  gold  should  supplant  silver,  to  which 
end  an  incorrect  rating  was  desired.1  By  the  laws 
of  1792  and  1793  the  gold  eagle  weighed  270  grains 
and  was  ^  fine.  The  silver  dollar  weighed  416 
grains  and  was  y|||  fine,  giving  a  ratio  of  1 : 15. 
The  market  ratio  was,  from  1792  to  1830,  about 
1 : 15.6.  Therefore  gold  was  not  money,  but  mer- 
chandise. From  1828  to  1833  the  average  premium 
on  gold  at  Philadelphia  was  4-|  per  cent.2  The 
reports  before  Congress,  in  1834,  showed  that  the 
real  ratio  was  between  1 : 15.6  and  1 : 15.8.  The 
mint  put  1 : 15.8  as  the  highest  ratio  admissible. 
Duncan,  of  Illinois,  in  a  speech,  showed  that  the 
ratio  since  1821  had  been,  on  an  average,  1 : 15.625.3 
These  authorities  were  all  disregarded. 

The  administration  politicians  had  determined  to 
have  gold  as  a  matter  of  taste,  and  the  southern 
gold  interest  wanted  it.  The  law  of  June  28, 1834, 
made  the  gold  eagle  weigh  258  grains,  of  which 
232  grains  were  to  be  pure ;  fineness,  .8992.  The 
silver  dollar  was  unaltered.  The  ratio  of  gold  to 
silver,  by  this  law,  was  therefore  1 : 16.002.  The 
old  eagles  were  worth  in  the  new  ones  $10.681,  or 
old  gold  coins  were  worth  94.827  cents  per  penny- 
weight in  the  new.  Taking  gold  to  silver  at 

1  Raguet,  236.  2  Raguet,  250.  8  47  Niles,  29. 


SPECIE  CURRENCY  391 

1 : 15.625,  an  old  silver  dollar  was  worth  11.024  in 
the  new  gold  one,  and  as  the  silver  dollar  had 
been  the  standard  of  prices  and  contracts,  and  the 
new  gold  one  now  was  such,  the  money  of  account 
had  been  depreciated  2^  per  cent.  In  the  new 
standard,  a  pound  sterling  was  worth,  metal  for 
metal,  $4.87073 ;  and  if  the  old  arbitrary  par,  XI  = 
$4.44|,  were  100,  the  true  par  of  exchange  would 
be  109.59.  Of  course  the  supposed  gain  to  the 
gold  producers  from  the  incorrect  rating  was  a 
pure  delusion.  They  got  no  more  goods  for  their 
gold  than  they  would  have  got  before,  save  in  so 
far  as  the  United  States  added  some  small  incre- 
ment to  the  previous  demand  in  the  whole  world 
for  gold.  The  bullion  brokers  won  by  exchan- 
ging gold  coins  for  silver  coins  and  exporting  the 
latter. 

In  December,  1834,  Woodbury,  who  had  become 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  gave  the  following  sta- 
tistics of  the  circulation  on  December  1st:  local 
bank  paper,  from  157,000,000  to  168,000,000; 
Bank  of  the  United  States  paper,  116,000,000; 
gold,  14,000,000;  silver,  $16,000,000;  total  ac- 
tive circulation  per  head,  $7.00.  In  bank :  specie, 
$18,250,000  ;  paper,  $35,000,000 ;  grand  total  per 
head,  $10.00.1  The  currency  was  then  in  a  very 
sound  condition.2 

The  bank  paper  increased  before  the  gold  could 
be  brought  into  circulation,  and  the  gold  currency 
never  was  made  a  fact.  Silver  rose  to  a  premium, 
1  Document  K,  p.  64.  2  See  page  372. 


392  ANDREW  JACKSON 

and  was  melted  or  exported.1  The  new  mint  law 
therefore  produced  the  inconvenience  of  driving 
out  silver  just  when  the  administration  was  trying 
to  abolish  small  notes.  A  gold  dollar  had  been 
proposed  in  the  new  law,  but  the  provision  for  it 
was  stricken  out.  The  silver  dollars  then  on  hand 
appear  to  have  been  all  clipped  or  worn.2  The 
first  which  had  been  coined  since  1805  were  coined 
in  1836.3  They  could  not,  however,  be  kept  in  cir- 
culation. By  the  act  of  January  18,  1837,  two 
tenths  of  a  grain  were  added  to  the  pure  contents 
of  the  eagle.  This  made  the  fineness  just  .900. 
The  pure  contents  of  the  silver  dollar  were  left 
unaltered,  but  the  gross  weight  was  reduced  to 
412^  grains,  so  that  the  fineness  of  this  coin  also 
was  .900.  The  ratio  of  the  metals  in  the  coinage 
was  then  1 : 15.988.  One  pound  sterling  was  then 
worth  $4.8665,  or,  if  $4.44|  be  assumed  100,  par  of 
exchange  was  109|.  As  soon  as  the  crisis  broke 
out,  in  1837,  all  specie  disappeared,  and  notes  and 
tickets  for  the  smallest  denominations  came  into 
use. 

Ac  the  session  of  1835-36  Benton  tried  to  get  a 
resolution  passed  that  nothing  but  gold  or  silver 
should  be  taken  for  public  lands.  He  did  not  suc- 
ceed. After  Congress  adjourned,  July  11,  1836, 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  issued,  by  the  Presi- 
dent's order,  a  circular  to  all  the  land  offices,  known 
afterwards  as  the  "  Specie  Circular,"  ordering  that 
only  gold,  or  silver,  or  land  scrip  should  be  received 

i  47  Niles,  147.  2  37  Niles,  393.  8  51  Niles,  241.  ' 


THE  SPECIE  CIRCULAR  393 

for  public  lands.  The  occasion  for  this  order  was 
serious.  The  sales  of  public  lands  were  increasing 
at  an  extraordinary  rate.  Lands  were  sold  for 
$4,800,000  in  1834 ;  for  $14,700,000  in  1835 ; 
for  $24,800,000  in  1836.  The  receipts  for  the 
lands  consisted  largely  of  notes  of  irresponsible 
banks.  Land  speculators  organized  a  "  bank,"  got 
it  appointed  a  deposit  bank  if  they  could,  issued 
notes,  borrowed  them  and  bought  land ;  the  notes 
were  deposited ;  they  borrowed  them  again,  and  so 
on  indefinitely.  The  guarantees  required  of  the 
deposit  banks  were  idle  against  such  a  scheme. 
There  was,  of  course,  little  specie  in  the  West  on 
account  of  the  flood  of  paper  there.  The  circular 
caused  inconvenience,  and  bad  temper  on  the  part 
of  those  who  were  checked  in  their  transactions, 
It  also  caused  trouble  and  expense  in  transporting 
specie  from  the  East,  and  it  no  doubt  made  a  de- 
mand for  specie  in  the  East  against  the  banks 
there.  In  the  existing  state  of  the  eastern  banks 
this  demand  was  probably  just  the  touch  needed 
to  push  down  the  rickety  pretense  of  solvency  which 
they  were  keeping  up.  Specie  could  not  be  drawn 
in  from  Europe,  except  by  a  great  fall  in  prices 
and  a  large  contraction  of  the  currency.  Either 
through  demand  for  specie  or  fall  in  prices,  the  in- 
flated currency  must  collapse,  and  the  crisis  was  at 
hand.  Moreover,  the  banks  were  under  notice  to 
sarrender,  on  January  1st,  one  fourth  of  the  public 
deposits.  Thousands  of  people  who  were  carrying 
commodities  or  property  for  a  rise,  or  who  were  en- 


394  ANDREW  JACKSON 

gaged  in  enterprises,  to  finish  which  they  depended 
on  bank  loans,  found  themselves  arrested  by  the 
exorbitant  rate  for  loans.  The  speculative  period 
in  England  had  also  run  its  course,  and  the  infla- 
tion here  could  no  longer  be  sustained  by  borrow- 
ing there.  From  all  these  facts,  it  is  plain  that 
the  specie  circular  may  have  played  the  role  of 
the  spark  which  produces  an  explosion,  when  all 
the  conditions  and  materials  have  been  prepared  ; 
but  those  who  called  the  circular  the  cause  of  the 
crisis  made  a  mistake  which  is  only  too  common  in 
the  criticism  of  economic  events.  A  similar  cir- 
cular was  issued  in  Adams's  administration,  which 
had  hardly  been  noticed.1  There  was  a  great  deal 
of  outcry  against  the  President  for  high-handed 
proceedings  in  this  matter,  but  without  reason. 
There  were  only  two  forms  of  currency  which  were 
at  this  time  by  law  receivable  for  lands,  —  specie 
and  notes  of  specie  value.2  The  notes  which  were 
being  received  in  the  West  were  not  of  specie 
value. 

A  bill  to  annul  the  specie  circular  passed  the 
Senate,  41  to  5,  and  the  House,  143  to  59.  The 
President  sent  it  to  the  State  Department  at  11.45 
p.  M.,  March  3,  1837,  and  filed  his  reasons  for  not 
signing  it,  it  having  been  sent  to  him  less  than  ten 
days  before  the  end  of  the  session.  His  reason  for 
not  signing  the  bill  was  that  it  was  obscure. 

1  7  Adams,  427. 

2  Report  by  Silas  Wright,  May  16,  1838,  with  history  of  the 
laws  about  currency  receivable  at  the  Treasury,  55  Niles,  106. 


WINDING  UP  UNITED  STATES  BANK     395 

The  End  of  the  Bank  of  the  United  States. — 
The  charter  of  the  Bank  of  the  United  States  was 
to  expire  March  3,  1836.  The  history  of  the  in- 
ternal affairs  of  the  Bank,  after  Tyler's  report  in 
1834,  was  not  known  to  the  public  until  1841, 
when  committees  of  the  stockholders  published  re- 
ports, from  which  we  are  able  to  state  the  internal 
history  of  the  Bank  in  its  true  historical  connection. 
March  6,  1835,  by  a  resolution  of  the  directors, 
the  exchange  committee  was  directed  to  loan  the 
capital  of  the  Bank,  so  fast  as  it  should  be  released, 
on  call,  on  stock  collateral.  The  exchange  com- 
mittee, from  this  time  on,  secured  entire  control  of 
the  Bank.  During  the  year  1835,  branches  were 
sold  for  bonds  having  from  one  to  five  years  to 
run.  Down  to  November,  fifteen  branches  had 
been  sold.1  In  November,  projects  began  to  be 
talked  about  for  getting  a  State  charter  from 
Pennsylvania.2  There  was  a  great  deal  of  jealousy 
at  this  time  between  New  York  and  Philadelphia. 
There  was  a  proposition  for  a  great  fifty-million- 
dollar  bank  at  New  York,  and  it  seemed  that  if 
Philadelphia  lost  her  bank,  and  New  York  got 
one,  the  financial  hegemony  would  be  permanently 
transferred.  In  December,  1835,  after  the  great 
fire  in  New  York,  the  Bank  of  the  United  States 
was  asked  to  give  aid.  It  did  so  by  opening  credits 
for  12,000,000  in  favor  of  the  insurance  companies.3 

The  act  of  the  Pennsylvania  Legislature,  by 
which  the  United  States  Bank  of  Pennsylvania 

1  49  NUes,  182.  2  49  Niles,  162.  8  49  Niles,  307. 


396  ANDREW  JACKSON 

was  chartered,  is,  on  its  face,  a  piece  of  corrupt 
legislation.  Its  corruption  was  addressed  to  the 
people  of  the  State,  not  to  private  individuals.  It 
comprised  three  projects  in  an  obvious  log-rolling 
combination,  —  remission  of  taxes,  public  improve- 
ments, and  bank  charter.  The  Bank  was  char- 
tered for  thirty  years.1  It  was  to  pay  a  bonus  of 
$2,500,000,  pay  $100,000  per  year  for  twenty 
years  for  schools,  loan  the  State  not  over  a  mil- 
lion a  year  in  temporary  loans  at  four  per  cent, 
and  subscribe  $640,000  to  railroads  and  turnpikes. 
Personal  taxes  were  repealed  by  other  sections  of 
the  bill,  and  $1,368,147  were  appropriated,  out  of 
the  Bank  bonus,  for  various  canals  and  turnpikes. 
Either  this  bill  was  corruptly  put  together  to  win 
strength  by  enlisting  local  and  personal  interests 
in  favor  of  it,  or  else  the  Pennsylvanians,  having 
got  their  big  Bank  to  themselves,  set  to  work  to 
plunder  it.  The  charter  passed  the  State  Senate, 
19  to  12,  and  the  House,  57  to  30.2  Inasmuch  as 
the  democrats  had  a  majority  in  the  Senate,  it  was 
charged  that  private  corruption  had  passed  the 
bill.  An  investigation  resulted  in  nothing.  There 
was  found,  in  1841,  an  entry,  of  about  the  date  of 
the  charter,  of  $400,000  expenditure,  vouchers  for 
which  could  not  be  produced.8  Biddle  represented 
the  case  as  if  the  proposition  that  the  State  should 
charter  the  Bank  had  originated  with  leading  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature,  who  asked  the  Bank  if  it 

i  49  Niles,  377,  396.  2  49  Niles,  434. 

»  Second  report,  1841,  60  Niles,  202. 


RETROSPECT  OF  THE  BANK  WAR        397 

would  accept  a  State  charter.1  The  act  was  dated 
February  18,  1836.  The  Bank  accepted  the  char- 
ter, and  presented  a  service  of  plate  to  Biddle.2 

In  the  story  of  the  Bank  war,  which  has  been 
given  in  the  preceding  pages,  the  reader  has  per- 
ceived that  the  writer  does  not  believe  that  Jack- 
son's administration  had  a  case  against  the  Bank, 
or  that  the  charges  it  made  were  proved.  To  say 
this  is  to  say  that  Jackson's  administration  un- 
justly, passionately,  ignorantly,  and  without  regard 
to  truth,  assailed  a  great  and  valuable  financial 
institution,  and  calumniated  its  management.  Such 
was  the  opinion  of  people  of  that  generation,  at 
least  until  March  3,  1836.  Jackson's  charges 
against  the  Bank  were  held  to  be  not  proved.  The 
effect  of  them  naturally  was  to  make  confidence  in 
the  Bank  blind  and  deaf.  In  January,  1836,  when 
it  was  expected  that  the  Bank  would  wind  up  in 
two  months,  its  stock  stood  at  116.  For  four  years 
afterwards,  nothing  seemed  able  to  destroy  public 
confidence  in  the  Bank.  One  thing  alone  suggests 
a  doubt,  and  makes  one  hold  back  from  the  adop- 
tion of  a  positive  judgment  in  favor  of  the  Bank, 
even  down  to  the  end  of  its  national  charter : 
that  is,  a  doubt  of  Biddle's  sincerity.  If  he  was 
not  sincere,  we  have  no  measure  for  the  degree  of 
misrepresentation  there  may  have  been  in  his  plau- 
sible statements  and  explanations,  or  for  how  much 
may  have  been  hidden  under  the  financial  exposi- 
tions he  was  so  fond  of  making,  and  which  were, 
*  Biddle  to  Adams,  51  NUes,  230.  2  49  Niles,  441. 


398  ANDREW  JACKSON 

like  the  expositions  of  a  juggler,  meant  to  mystify 
the  audience  still  more. 

The  final  catastrophe  of  the  Bank  has  always 
affected  the  judgment  which  all  students  of  its 
history  have  formed  of  the  merits  of  its  struggle 
with  Jackson.  The  Jackson  men  always  claimed 
that  the  end  proved  that  Jackson  and  his  coterie 
were  right  all  the  time.  This  has  probably  been 
the  general  verdict.  The  whigs  felt  the  weight  of 
the  inference,  and  they  tried  to  distinguish  between 
the  Bank  of  the  United  States  and  the  United 
States  Bank  of  Pennsylvania.  A  little  reflection 
will  show  that  both  these  views  are  erroneous.  A 
bank  may  go  on  well  and  be  sound  for  twenty 
years,  and  then  go  wrong.  It  may  make  mistakes 
and  recover,  and  then  make  more  mistakes  and 
perish.  We  must  go  by  the  facts  all  the  way 
along.  The  State  bank  and  the  national  bank  of 
the  United  States  had  a  continuous,  an  integral 
life.  The  attempt  to  save  one  and  condemn  the 
other,  aside  from  an  investigation  of  the  merits,  is 
a  partisan  proceeding.  It  is  not  sound  historically 
or  financially.  We  have  now  reached  as  just  an 
opinion  as  we  can  form  about  the  Bank  up  to  the 
time  of  its  State  charter. 

The  State  Bank  started  on  its  career  under  very 
bad  auspices.  It  never  threw  off  the  suspicion 
which  attached  to  its  legislative  birth.  It  was  too 
large  for  its  new  sphere,  yet  pride  prevented  its 
reduction.  It  had  other  aims  than  to  win  profits 
by  sound  banking.  It  wanted  to  prove  itself 


UNITED  STATES  BANK  OF  PENNSYLVANIA    399 

necessary,  or  to  show  itself  a  public  benefactor,  or 
to  sustain  the  rivalry  of  Philadelphia  with  New 
York.  Biddle,  freed  from  the  restraints  of  the 
old  organization,  launched  out  into  sensational 
banking,  and  tested  his  theories  of  banking  to  the 
utmost.  There  is  scarcely  anything  vicious  and 
unsound  in  banking  which  the  great  Bank  did  not 
illustrate  during  the  next  five  years.  Its  officers 
plundered  it.  Its  end  was  so  ignominious  that  no 
one  wanted  to  remember  that  he  had  ever  believed 
in  it. 

On  the  1st  of  February,  1836,  the  account  of 
the  Bank l  showed  a  surplus  of  $7,800,000,  which 
was  expected  to  pay  off  the  bonus,  notes,  etc. 
There  were  120,000,000  loaned  on  stocks,  and 
there  was  the  State  bonus,  the  government  stock, 
and  the  circulation  of  the  old  bank  to  be  paid. 
New  stock  was  sold  to  pay  off  the  government 
stock.  £1,000,000  were  borrowed  in  London, 
and  12,500,000  francs  in  Paris.2  Jaudon  was  sent 
to  England  as  agent  of  the  Bank.  In  May,  the 
money  market  at  New  York  being  very  stringent, 
the  Bank  was  asked  for  aid,  which  it  gave.3  By 
an  act  of  June  15,  1836,  Congress  repealed  the 
14th  section  of  the  Bank  charter.  This  put  an 
end  to  the  receipt  of  the  notes  of  the  old  Bank  by 
the  Treasury,  and  crippled  the  circulation  of  the 
Bank.  In  October  there  was  a  report  that  the 
Bank  would  surrender  its  State  charter  if  it  could 

*  60  Niles,  106.  2  First  report,  1841,  60  Niles,  105. 

«  50  Niles,  267. 


400  ANDREW   JACKSON 

get  back  its  bonus.1  In  that  same  month,  how- 
ever, Biddle  wrote  another  letter  to  Adams  to 
show  the  wrong  of  trying  to  repeal  the  State  char- 
ter. June  23d,  Congress  authorized  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  to  treat  with  the  Bank  for  the 
payment  of  the  government  stock.  No  agreement 
was  reached,  but,  February  25,  1837,  the  Bank 
sent  a  memorial  to  the  Speaker,  in  which  it  offered 
to  pay  off  the  public  shares,  at  $  115.58  per  share, 
in  four  instalments,  September,  1837-38-39-40. 
This  proposition  was  accepted,  March  3,  1837,  and 
the  instalments  were  all  paid. 

In  his  message,  1836,  Jackson  discharged  a  last 
broadside  at  the  Bank.  He  seemed  to  be  as  angry 
that  the  Bank  had  escaped  annihilation  as  he  was 
in  1818  that  Billy  Bowlegs  got  across  the  Suwanee 
river.  He  complained  that  the  Bank  had  not  paid 
off  the  public  stock,  and  was  reissuing  its  old  notes. 
This  latter  proceeding  was  stopped  by  an  act  of 
July  6, 1838.  The  Bank  failed  three  times  during 
the  years  of  commercial  distress  which  followed, 
namely,  May  10,  1837,  with  all  the  other  banks ; 
October  9,  1839,  when  it  carried  down  with  it  all 
which  had  resumed,  except  those  in  New  York 
and  a  few  in  New  England;  February  4,  1841, 
when  it  was  entirely  ruined.  Its  stockholders  lost 
all  their  capital. 

Biddle  had  resigned  March  29,  1839,  but  he 
had  been  so  identified  with  the  Bank  that  its  ruin 
was  attributed  to  him.  He  fell  into  disgrace.  He 
1  51  Niles,  113. 


UNITED  STATES  BANK  OF  PENNSYLVANIA    401 

was  arraigned  for  conspiracy  to  plunder  the  stock- 
holders, but  escaped  on  a  technicality.  He  died, 
insolvent  and  broken-hearted,  February  27,  1844, 
aged  fifty-eight.1 

Webster  declared,  in  1842,  that  a  bank  of  the 
United  States  founded  on  a  private  subscription 
was  an  "  obsolete  idea ; "  2  but  perhaps  the  unkind- 
est  cut  of  all  was  that  the  Whig  Almanac  for  1843 
could  refer  to  "  Nick  Biddle  "  as  a  rascal,  and  to 
"  his  Bank  "  as  one  which  was  "  corruptly  man- 
aged." 

1  Ingersoll,  285 ;  a  very  touching  description  of  Biddle's  last 
years. 
3  2  Webster'g  Works,  135. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE  NEW  SPIRIT  IN  VARIOUS   POINTS  OF  FOREIGN 
AND  DOMESTIC  POLICY 

Quarrel  with  France.  —  The  neglect  of  France 
to  fulfil  the  stipulations  of  the  treaty  of  July  4, 
1831,  offered  the  occasion  for  the  most  important 
diplomatic  negotiation  in  which  Jackson  was  en- 
gaged. In  his  message  of  1834,  he  gave  a  full 
account  of  the  treaty  and  of  the  neglect  of  the 
French  Chambers,  at  two  sessions,  to  appropriate 
money  to  meet  engagements  which  had  been  made, 
on  behalf  of  the  French  nation,  by  the  constitu- 
tional authorities  of  France.  The  King  had  shown 
strong  personal  interest  in  the  matter,1  and  had 
exerted  himself  to  secure  a  satisfactory  settlement 
and  to  prevent  any  bad  feeling  from  arising  be- 
tween the  two  nations.  In  the  mean  time  the 
United  States  had  reduced  the  duties  on  wine, 
according  to  the  engagement  in  the  treaty,  by 
an  act  of  July  13,  1832,  and  France  was  getting 
the  benefit  of  the  treaty  without  performing  her 
share  of  it.  It  seemed  to  Jackson  that  this  state 
sf  things  called  for  spirited  action.  Moreover, 

1  Livingston's  dispatch,  47  Niles,  417.    Rives  came  home  in 
,$3L    Livingston  went  out  in  1833. 


RELATIONS  WITH  FRANCE  403 

Livingston  wrote  a  very  important  dispatch  from 
Paris,  November  22,  1834,1  in  which  he  said  that 
there  was  a  disposition  in  France  to  wait  and  see 
what  the  message  would  be  ;  also  that  the  moderate 
tone  of  the  United  States  up  to  this  time  had  had 
a  bad  effect.  "  From  all  this  you  may  imagine  the 
anxiety  I  shall  feel  for  the  arrival  of  the  Presi- 
dent's message.  On  its  tone  will  depend,  very 
much,  not  only  the  payment  of  our  claims,  but  our 
national  reputation  for  energy."  The  message  of 
1834,  which  must  have  been  prepared  before  this 
dispatch  was  received,  did  not  sin  by  moderation 
and  lack  of  energy.2  The  Due  de  Broglie,  the 
French  minister,  afterwards  declared  that  the  ap- 
propriation would  have  been  passed  in  December, 
1834,  if  copies  of  this  message  had  not  just  then 
been  received.  Jackson  was  under  erroneous  in- 
formation as  to  the  time  of  meeting  of  the  French 
Chambers.  The  Due  de  Broglie  had  also,  in  the 
March  previous,  when  the  bill  drawn  by  the  Amer- 
ican Treasury  went  to  protest,  found  fault  with 
the  American  government  for  selling  the  bill  to 
a  bank,  instead  of  receiving  the  money  through 
a  diplomatic  agent.3  He  argued  that  the  United 

1  47  Niles,  417. 

2  Curtis  (Buchanan,  i.  235)  gives,  without  mentioning  authority, 
a  story  that  Judge  Catron  was  sent  to  Jackson,  by  friends,  at  this 
time,  to  ask  him  to  make  his  message,  so  far  as  it  referred  to 
the  difficulty  with  France,  mild,  and  that  Jackson  took  from  his 
drawer  a  letter  from  Louis  Philippe,  urging  that  the  message 
should  contain  a  threat  of  war,  lest  the  payment  be  defeated  in 
France.  8  47  Niles,  327. 


404  ANDREW  JACKSON 

States  ought  not  to  have  regarded  the  treaty  as 
definitive  until  all  the  organs  of  the  French  govern- 
ment had  assented  to  it.  In  his  message,  before 
mentioned,  Jackson  suggested  that,  if  Congress 
inferred  from  the  inaction  of  France  that  she  did 
not  intend  to  fulfil  the  treaty,  it  might  proceed  to 
measures  of  coercion,  amongst  which  he  mentioned 
reprisals,  as  suitable  and  "  peaceable."  He  pro* 
posed  that  a  law  should  be  passed  authorizing  re- 
prisals, if  France  should  neglect  the  fulfilment  of 
the  treaty  beyond  a  certain  time.  He  added  that 
this  suggestion  ought  not  to  be  regarded  by  France 
as  a  "  menace."  Chevalier  thought  that  Jackson, 
having  had  his  bout  with  the  nullifiers,  found  his 
blood  heated  and  his  appetite  for  war  reawakened ; 
that  he  satisfied  this  appetite  first  in  the  Bank  war, 
and  then  in  the  difficulty  with  France.1 

The  message  caused  great  excitement  in  France, 
The  French  journals  all  regarded  it  as  a  menace. 
The  feeling  was  aroused  that  France  could  not 
then  pay  without  dishonor.2  Additional  embar- 
rassment arose  from  the  fact  that  the  King's  active 
interest  was  revealed  by  the  documents  published 
in  America.  The  bad  temper  of  the  French  was 
still  further  increased  when  they  read  Bives's  let- 
ters, in  which  he  seemed  to  boast  of  having  out- 
witted the  French  minister,  and  Livingston's  letter, 
In  which  he  suggested  that  France  never  would  pay 
unless  the  message  brought  her  behavior  before 

1  Chevalier,  177.     See  his  estimate  of  Jackson's  character. 

2  French  newspapers  quoted,  47  Niles,  327. 


RELATIONS  WITH  FRANCE  405 

Congress  in  a  spirited  way.  The  Committee  on 
Foreign  Eelations  of  the  Senate  made  a  report,1 
in  which  they  expressed  full  agreement  with  the 
President  on  all  the  essential  points ;  but  they  re- 
garded the  proposition  to  employ  reprisals  as  pre- 
mature, and  likely  to  embarrass  the  negotiations. 
In  the  House,  two  reports  were  made,2  but  they 
were  not  important.  The  Senate  voted  unani- 
mously, January  14,  1835,  that  it  was  not  expe- 
dient to  adopt  any  legislative  measures  in  regard 
to  the  relations  with  France.  In  the  House,  J.  Q. 
Adams  took  the  lead  in  sustaining  Jackson's  po- 
sition, and  was  largely  influential  in  securing  the 
adoption  by  the  House,  unanimously,  March  2, 
1835,  of  a  resolution  that  the  execution  of  the 
treaty  should  be  insisted  on.  The  French  min- 
ister to  the  United  States  was  recalled.  His  final 
note  of  January  14,  1835,  was  not  received  by 
Jackson,  but  was  referred  back  to  the  French  gov- 
ernment ;  they  approved  of  it. 

In  December,  1834,  the  French  Chambers  re- 
jected a  bill  appropriating  money  to  pay  the  indem- 
nities. A  cabinet  crisis  followed,  not  on  account 
of  this  vote,  but  also  not  entirely,  as  it  appears, 
without  reference  to  it.  The  Due  de  Broglie,  how- 
ever, returned  to  office  with  the  understanding  that 
provision  was  to  be  made  for  fulfilling  the  treaty. 
April  25,  1835,  the  French  Chambers  passed  the 
appropriation,  but  with  a  condition  that  no  money 
should  be  paid  until  "satisfactory  explanations'1 
1  47  Niles,  344.  2  48  Niles,  5  and  6. 


406  ANDREW  JACKSON 

of  the  President's  message  of  1834  should  be  re- 
ceived. The  original  condition  in  the  law  was, 
"  until  it  shall  have  been  ascertained  that  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States  has  adopted  no  mea- 
sures injurious  to  French  interests ;  "  l  but  it  was 
afterwards  changed  to  the  other  form 2  by  amend- 
ment. Livingston  wrote  a  note,  April  25,  1835, 
declaring  that  the  message  was  a  domestic  docu- 
ment, for  which  no  responsibility  to  any  foreign 
power  would  be  admitted ;  that  the  message  of 
1834  itself  contained  a  sufficient  disclaimer;  and 
that  the  condition  which  had  been  incorporated  in 
the  act  of  the  French  Chambers  would  prevent  it 
from  being  a  satisfactory  settlement.3  He  then 
came  home.  In  Congress,  whose  session  ended 
March  4th,  an  amendment  to  the  usual  appropria- 
tion bill  for  fortifications  was  proposed,  by  which 
$3,000,000  were  appropriated  for  extraordinary  ex- 
penditures for  defence,  in  case  such  should  become 
necessary  before  the  next  session.  The  whole 
bill  was  lost,  borne  down,  as  it  appears,  by  this 
amendment.  As  the  relations  with  France  were 
still  more  critical  when  Congress  next  met,  and 
nothing  had  been  done  for  defence,  on  account 
of  the  failure  of  that  bill,  a  great  deal  of  crimina- 
tion and  recrimination  took  place  in  an  effort  to 
fix  the  blame  and  responsibility.  No  result  was 
reached.4 

In  the  message  of  1835,  Jackson  reviewed  the 

1  47  Niles,  436.  2  48  Niles,  220. 

8  48  Niles,  318.  *  49  Niles,  446. 


RUPTURE   OF  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS    407 

whole  affair,  insisted  that  he  had  never  used  men- 
ace, and  alluded  to  Livingston's  final  note  to  the 
French  minister  as  having  clearly  so  stated.  He 
said  that  he  would  never  apologize.  A  long  dis- 
patch of  the  Due  de  Broglie  to  the  French  charge 
here,  in  June,  1835,  set  forth  the  French  case.  It 
was  read  to  Forsyth,  but  he  declined  to  receive  a 
copy.1  Jackson  directed  Barton,  charge  d'affaires 
at  Paris,  to  make  a  specific  inquiry  what  France 
intended  to  do.  The  Due  de  Broglie  replied  that 
France  would  pay  whenever  the  United  States 
would  say  that  it  regretted  the  misunderstanding, 
that  the  misunderstanding  arose  from  mistake,  that 
the  good  faith  of  France  had  not  been  questioned, 
and  that  no  menace  was  ever  intended.  This  ques- 
tion and  answer  were  exchanged  in  October,  1835.2 
Barton  came  home  in  January,  1836,  and  Pageot, 
the  French  charge,  was  recalled  at  the  same  time, 
so  that  diplomatic  relations  were  entirely  broken 
off. 

January  18,  1836,  Jackson  sent  in  a  special 
message  on  the  relations  with  France,8  sending 
copies  of  Barton's  correspondence.  Livingston 
toned  down  4  this  message  somewhat  from  the  first 
intention ;  nevertheless  Jackson  in  it  again  recom- 
mended coercive  measures.  He  proposed  to  ex- 
clude French  ships  and  products  from  the  ports  of 
the  United  States ;  that  is  to  say,  his  reserve  of 
force  by  which  to  sustain  his  spirited  diplomacy 

1  49  Niles,  353.  2  49  Niles,  347. 

8  49  Niles,' 345.  *  Hunt's  Livingston,  428. 


108  ANDREW  JACKSON 

was  the  old,  imbecile,  and  worn-out  device  of  a  com- 
mercial  war.  He  said  that  France  was  strengthen- 
ing her  navy ;  if  against  us,  an  apology  from  us 
was  out  of  the  question. 

Thus  this  question  had  been  pushed  into  the 
worst  kind  of  a  diplomatic  dead-lock,  out  of  which 
neither  party  could  advance  without  fighting,  and 
neither  could  recede  without  (supposed)  dishonor. 
That  is  the  evil  of  spirited  diplomacy,  for  good 
diplomacy  would  avoid  such  a  dead-lock  as  one  of 
the  worst  blunders  possible  in  the  profession.  The 
English  government  now  intervened,  and  offered 
its  good  offices  as  mediator.  The  French  govern- 
ment declared  to  the  English  that  the  President's 
message  of  1835  had  removed  the  bad  impressions 
of  that  of  1834.  This  declaration  was  made  known 
to  Forsyth  by  the  English  minister  at  Washington, 
and  was  transmitted  to  Congress,  with  a  message 
by  the  President,  February  22,  1836.1  It  was 
very  good-natured  of  France  to  regard  the  message 
of  1835  as  compliance  with  the  demands  which 
had  been  made  to  Barton  in  October.  She  simply 
covered  her  retreat,  for  she  had  been  in  the  wrong 
on  the  merits  of  the  question  from  the  beginning, 
and  she  justly  bore  half  the  blame  of  the  diplo- 
matic dead-lock.  March  19,  1836,  the  King  of 
France  ordered  four  instalments  of  the  indemnity 
to  be  paid  at  once,  in  order  to  settle  the  matter 
down  to  date,  according  to  the  terms  of  the 
treaty. 

1  49  Niles,  442. 


THE  POST-OFFICE  DEPARTMENT         409 

The  Post- Office. —  Barry,  the  Postmaster-Gen- 
eral, was  the  only  member  of  the  cabinet  retained 
in  1831.  In  his  hands  the  administration  of  the 
Post-Office  Department,  both  in  its  business  and 
its  finances,  steadily  declined.  The  complaints  in 
1834-35  of  the  irregularity  and  delay  of  the  mails 
were  very  numerous  and  bitter.  The  department 
was  also  running  into  arrears  financially.  Both 
Houses  of  Congress,  at  the  session  of  1834-35, 
investigated  the  department.  Barry's  personal 
honesty  does  not  seem  to  have  been  questioned, 
but  his  chief  clerk,  Eev.  Obadiah  B.  Brown,1  be- 
came for  the  time  a  very  distinguished  man,  on 
account  of  relations  with  mail  contractors,  which, 
if  innocent,  were  very  improper.  The  contractors 
had  made  use  of  familiar  devices,  "  straw  bids," 
"  unbalanced  bids,"  "  expedited  service,"  etc.,  if 
not  of  corrupt  influences  on  subordinates  in  the 
department,  by  which  chicanery  shrewd  men  take 
advantage  of  inefficient  public  officers.2  Barry  re- 
fused to  answer  some  of  the  questions  put  to  him, 
and  in  place  thereof,  after  the  fashion  of  the  time, 
published  an  "  Appeal  to  the  American  People."  3 
Brown  resigned  in  an  official  document,  imitated 
apparently  from  Van  Buren's  resignation  of  1831.4 
He  too  published  an  "  Appeal,"  etc.  Jackson 
selected  Kendall  for  Barry's  successor,  May  1, 
1835.  Kendall's  administrative  ability  was  great, 
and  he  speedily  reorganized  the  department,  and 

1  See  page  443.  2  47  Niles,  381,  393. 

a  46  Niles,  338.  *  47  Niles,  395. 


410  ANDREW  JACKSON 

restored  its  efficiency.  There  was  great  doubt, 
however,  when  he  was  appointed,  whether  he  would 
be  confirmed.  Barry  was  sent  as  minister  to  Spain, 
but  died  on  his  way  thither. 

Slavery.  —  The  emancipation  of  slaves  in  the 
British  West  Indies  in  1833  gave  a  great  impulse  in 
the  United  States  to  abolition  sentiment  and  effort, 
which  had  not  been  active  since  the  compromise  of 
1820  was  adopted.  The  new  spirit  was  manifested 
in  the  organization  of  societies,  distribution  of 
pamphlets  and  newspapers,  petitions  to  Congress 
to  abolish  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  and 
other  forms  of  agitation.  The  first  efforts  of 
this  kind  were  frowned  down  all  over  the  North, 
but  the  general  movement  grew.  The  sentiments 
of  democracy  and  of  religion  were  both  against 
slavery,  and  every  step  which  was  taken  to  arrest 
the  agitation  —  the  gag  law  in  Congress,  by  which 
petitions  about  slavery  were  practically  shut  out, 
and  the  mob  violence  which  was  employed  against 
the  agitators  —  only  strengthened  it.  Towards 
the  end  of  Jackson's  second  administration  the 
antislavery  agitation  was  a  real  growing  movement, 
and  an  element  in  the  social  and  civil  life  of  the 
nation.  The  story  of  these  things  has  been  often 
told  in  detail,  and  may  be  passed  over  here.  The 
history  of  the  United  States  has,  in  fact,  been 
studied  chiefly  with  regard  to  the  slavery  question. 
Jackson's  administration  was  not  called  upon  to 
act  on  the  slavery  issue  save  in  one  or  two  points. 

The  abolition   societies  adopted   the  policy  of 


KENDALL'S  ORDER  ABOUT  THE  MAILS    411 

sending  documents,  papers,  and  pictures  against 
slavery  to  the  southern  States.  If  the  intention 
was,  as  was  charged,  to  incite  the  slaves  to  revolt, 
the  device,  as  it  seems  to  us  now,  must  have  fallen 
far  short  of  its  object,  for  the  chance  that  anything 
could  get  from  the  post-office  into  the  hands  of  a 
black  man,  without  going  through  the  hands  of  a 
white  man,  was  poor  indeed.  These  publications, 
however,  caused  a  panic  and  a  wild  indignation  in 
the  South.  The  postmaster  at  Charleston,  being 
lectured  by  the  people  there  on  his  duty,  turned  to 
the  Postmaster-General  for  orders.  August  4, 
1835,  Kendall  gave  an  ambiguous  reply,  so  far  as 
orders  were  concerned.  He,  however,  threw  the 
postmaster  on  his  own  discretion,  and  then  said 
for  himself :  "  By  no  act  or  direction  of  mine,  official 
or  private,  could  I  be  induced  to  aid,  knowingly, 
in  giving  circulation  to  papers  of  this  description, 
directly  or  indirectly  "  (i.  e.,  papers  alleged  by  the 
postmaster  to  be  "  the  most  inflammatory  and  in- 
cendiary, and  insurrectionary  to  the  last  degree  "  ). 
"  We  owe  an  obligation  to  the  laws,  but  a  higher 
one  to  the  communities  in  which  we  live,  and,  if 
the  former  be  perverted  to  destroy  the  latter,  it  is 
patriotism  to  disregard  them.  Entertaining  these 
views,  I  cannot  sanction,  and  will  not  condemn, 
the  step  you  have  taken  "  in  refusing  to  deliver 
certain  mail-matter.  August  22d  Kendall  wrote 
a  long  letter  to  Gouverneur,  postmaster  at  New 
York,  elaborating  and  defending  his  position.1 
1  49  Niles,  8. 


412  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Politics  were  already  combined  with  the  slavery 
question  in  this  incident.  Kendall's  confirmation 
by  the  Senate  was  very  doubtful,  and  Van  Buren's 
southern  support  was  ready  to  abandon  him  at 
a  moment's  notice,  if  slavery  came  into  account. 
Kendall  won  enough  southern  votes  to  carry  his 
confirmation. 

Texas  and  Mexico.  —  Monroe,  as  Secretary  of 
State,  in  1816,  instructed  the  Minister  to  Spain 
that  President  Madison  would  consent  to  the  Sa- 
bine  from  its  mouth  to  its  source  as  the  boundary 
between  the  United  States  and  the  Spanish  pro- 
vinces.1 When  J.  Q.  Adams,  in  1819,  was  nego- 
tiating with  the  Spanish  minister  the  treaty  by 
which  the  western  boundary  of  the  United  States 
was  defined,  he  could  get  no  encouragement  from 
Monroe  or  any  of  his  ministers  to  try  to  push  the 
boundary  westward.2  Monroe  appeared  to  think 
that  the  United  States  would  be  weakened  by 
including  territory  west  of  the  Sabine.3  It  was 
not  long,  however,  before  the  southern  slave-hold- 
ing interest  began  to  see  the  error  of  this  view  of 
the  matter.  After  the  Missouri  Compromise  was 
adopted,  it  appeared  that  wild  land  for  the  forma- 
tion of  new  free  States  was  owned  north  of  that 
line  from  the  Mississippi  to  the  Pacific,  while 
south  of  that  line  similar  land,  available  for  new 
slave  States,  extended  only  to  the  Sabine  and  the 
100-degree  meridian.  The  Richmond  "  Enquirer," 
March  7,  1820,  said:  The  southern  and  western 

i  12  Adams,  64.  2  See  page  84.  •  11  Adams,  348. 


SLAVERY  IN  TEXAS  413 

representatives  "  owe  it  to  themselves  to  keep  their 
eyes  firmly  fixed  on  Texas.  If  we  are  cooped 
up  on  the  north,  we  must  have  elbow  room  to 
the  west." 1  Only  a  few  persons,  however,  as 
yet  perceived  this  view  of  the  matter.  On  June 
23,  1819,  one  James  Long  proclaimed  the  inde- 
pendence of  Texas.2  In  1821  Austin  colonized 
three  hundred  families  in  Texas,  by  permission 
of  Mexico.  In  1826  some  American  immigrants 
at  Nacogdoches  declared  Texas  independent.  In 
1824  the  Emperor  of  Russia  tried  to  establish  ex- 
clusive control  over  the  Northern  Pacific,  and  the 
attention  of  the  most  far-seeing  statesmen  was 
drawn  to  the  interests  of  the  United  States  in  the 
Northwest  and  on  the  Pacific.  It  seems  necessary 
to  bear  in  mind,  all  through  the  history  of  the 
annexation  of  Texas,  the  connection  of  that  ques- 
tion with  the  acquisition  of  California,  including 
the  port  of  San  Francisco,  which  was  then  the 
chief  reason  for  wanting  California.  Adams,  when 
President,  in  1827,  sent  to  Poinsett,  minister  of 
the  United  States  in  Mexico,  orders  to  try  to  buy 
Texas  for  a  million  dollars.  Poinsett  did  not 
make  the  attempt.  He  gave  as  his  reason  the 
danger  of  irritating  Mexico  by  a  proposition  which 
was  sure  to  be  rejected.3 

In  1824  Mexico  took  the  first  steps  towards  the 
abolition  of   slavery.     By  a  decree  of  September 

l  Quoted  1  Tyler's  Tylers,  325.          *  17  Niles>  31 .  Jay. 
A  The  attempt  to  buy  Texas  seems  to  have  been  Clay's  act. 
ty.  7  Adams,  239,  240 ;  9  Adams,  379 ;  especially  11  Adams,  34& 


414  ANDREW  JACKSON 

15,  1829,  slavery  was  definitively  abolished.  In 
the  mean  time,  Americans  had  emigrated  to  Texas, 
chiefly  from  the  southern  States,  and  had  taken 
slaves  thither.  They  resisted  the  abolition  decree, 
and  the  Mexican  government  saw  itself  forced  to 
except  the  State  of  Texas  from  the  decree.  It, 
however,  united  Texas  with  Coahuila,  as  a  means 
of  holding  the  foreign  and  insubordinate  settlers 
in  check.  The  abolition  of  slavery  by  Mexico 
affected  the  southern  States  doubly :  first,  it  les- 
sened the  area  open  to  slavery ;  second,  it  put  a 
free  State  on  the  flank  and  rear  of  the  slave  terri« 
tory.  The  interest  of  the  southwestern  States  in 
the  independence  of  Texas,  or  its  annexation,  was 
at  once  aroused.  A  fanciful  doctrine,  in  the  taste 
of  the  southwestern  statesmen,  was  immediately 
invented  to  give  a  basis  for  stump-speaking  in 
defence  of  a  real  act  of  violence.  It  was  declared 
that  the  United  States  must  RE-annex  what  had 
once  been  maliciously  given  away  by  a  northern 
statesman.  The  gravity  and  .care  with  which 
re-annexation  was  talked  about  had  its  parallel 
only  in  the  theatrical  legislation  of  nullification. 
In  1780  Spain  claimed  that  the  eastern  boundary 
of  Louisiana  was  such  as  to  include  nearly  all  the 
present  State  of  Alabama,  and  the  Hiawasee,  Ten- 
nessee, Clinch,  and  Cumberland  rivers  through 
what  is  now  Tennessee  and  Kentucky.1  Inside  of 
this  claim  she  would  take  what  she  could  get. 
The  boundaries  to  the  westward  were  still  more 

1  Ramsey,  523. 


SLAVERY  IN  TEXAS  415 

vague.  Therefore,  any  one  who  chose  to  dabble 
in  the  authorities  could  prove  anything  he  liked, 
and  think  himself  no  contemptible  scholar  into  the 
bargain.  "Texas,"  as  a  State  of  the  Mexican 
confederation,  embraced  only  the  southeastern  cor- 
ner of  the  territory  now  included  in  the  State  of 
that  name.1 

The  anxiety  about  Texas  was  increasing  just 
when  Jackson  came  into  power.  The  South  ex- 
pected him  to  secure  it.  "  If  the  discussion  of  the 
acquisition  of  Texas  brings  on  the  agitation  of  the 
slave  question,  as  we  are  sure  that  it  will,  a  rupture 
with  the  northern  States  will  become  almost  in- 
evitable."2 Erving,  who  had  been  minister  to 
Spain  in  1819,  claimed  to  show  to  Jackson  that  he 
had,  at  that  time,  laid  the  basis  for  a  negotiation 
at  Madrid,  which  would  have  set  the  boundary  at 
the  Colorado,  or  even  at  the  Rio  Grande,  but  that 
the  negotiation  was  transferred  to  Washington, 
where  American  rights  were  surrendered.3  In  the 
summer  of  1829  Van  Buren  sent  instructions  to 
Poinsett  to  try  to  buy  Texas,  and  five  million 
dollars  were  offered  for  it.  In  1830  Mexico, 
which  had  at  first  welcomed  the  immigrants,  for- 
bade Americans  to  settle  in  Texas.  Of  course  this 
law  had  no  effect. 


1  Carey  &  Lea's  Atlas,  1822.     Cf.  Carey's  map  of   1814,  on 
which  Texas  seems  to  be  delineated  as  extending  from  the  Nuecea 
to  the  Sabine. 

2  Columbia,  S.  C.,  Telescope,  Nov.  6,  1829,  in  37  Niles,  213. 
8  Letters  in  the  Ford  MSS.    See  p.  459. 


416  ANDREW  JACKSON 

We  are  indebted  to  a  Dr.  Mayo,  who  was  a 
hanger-on  at  Washington  during  Jackson's  time, 
for  a  little  book  in  which  most  of  the  Texas 
intrigue  is  laid  bare.  Mayo  was  in  the  way  of 
picking  up  certain  information,  and  more  came  to 
him  by  accident.  He  gives  also  many  documents. 
He  was  intimate  with  ex-Governor  Samuel  Hous- 
ton, of  Tennessee,  an  old  companion  in  arms  of 
Jackson,  who  came  to  Washington  in  1829  to 
get  Jackson's  connivance  at  an  enterprise  which 
Houston  had  in  mind  for  revolutionizing  Texas. 
That  Jackson  did  connive  at  this  enterprise,  just 
as  he  supposed  Monroe  connived  at  his  own  pro- 
ceedings in  Florida,  cannot  be  established  by  proof, 
but  it  is  sustained  by  very  strong  inference.1 

April  5,  1832,  two  treaties  with  Mexico  were 
published,  —  one  of  commerce  and  one  of  bound- 
aries, —  confirming  the  boundary  of  the  Florida 
treaty. 

In  1833  a  revolution  broke  out  in  Mexico,  which 
threw  the  whole  country  into  anarchy,  Texas  with 
the  rest.  Santa  Anna  gradually  established  his 
authority.  In  the  autumn  of  1835  he  tried  to 
extend  it  over  Texas,  but  he  met  with  armed  resist- 
ance, and  was  defeated.  In  July,  1835,  Jackson 
authorized  an  offer  of  an  additional  half  million 
dollars  if  Mexico  would  allow  the  boundary,  after 

1  See  11  Adams,  41, 347,  357,  363 ;  and  his  Fifteen  Day  Speech, 
of  June,  1838.  Wise  (Decades,  148),  affirms  it  very  positively. 
He  is  better  authority  on  this  point  than  on  some  others  about 
fcrhich  he  is  very  positive,  e.  g.,  the  Adams-Clay  bargain. 


INDEPENDENCE  OF  TEXAS  417 

the  cession  of  Texas,  to  follow  the  Rio  Grande  up 
to  the  thirty-seventh  degree,  and  then  run  on  that 
parallel  to  the  Pacific.1  All  propositions  to  pur- 
chase failed.  After  the  Texans  proved  able  to 
beat  the  Mexicans  in  battle,  no  further  propositions 
of  that  kind  were  made. 

March  2,  1836,  a  Declaration  of  Independence, 
on  behalf  of  Texas,  was  adopted.  March  6th  the 
fort  pf  the  Alamo  was  taken  by  the  Mexicans,  and 
its  defenders  massacred.  On  the  27th  Colonels 
Fannin  and  Ward,  with  other  Texan  (or  Ameri- 
can) prisoners,  were  massacred.  On  the  17th  of 
March  the  Constitution  of  Texas  was  adopted. 
It  contained  the  strongest  provisions  in  favor  of 
slavery.  The  massacres  aroused  great  indignation 
in  the  Southwest,  and  hundreds  of  adventurers 
hastened  to  Texas,  where  Houston  was  now  chief 
in  command,  to  help  him  win  independence.2  The 
decisive  battle  was  fought  at  San  Jacinto,  April 
21st,  when  Santa  Anna  was  routed  and  captured. 
He  promised  everything  in  captivity,  but  cancelled 
his  promises  after  he  was  released.3 

i  11  Adams,  362.  2  JaVj  28. 

8  There  is  in  the  Ford  MSS.  a  copy  of  a  letter  from  Lewis  to 
Houston,  in  which  the  former  proposes  the  plan  which  was  fol- 
lowed :  "  To  turn  Santa  Anna  loose  upon  those  gentry  who  have 
possessed  themselves  of  his  place.  ...  If  he  were  to  return  to 
Mexico,  I  have  no  doubt  he  would  give  them  enough  to  do  at 
home,  instead  of  collecting  and  marching  their  forces  against 
you."  He  added  that,  if  Santa  Anna  did  not  keep  faith,  foreign 
nations  would  acknowledge  Texas.  He  states  that  the  letter  was 
written  at  the  suggestion  of  the  President,  that  it  had  been  read 
to  him,  and  that  he  desired  that  it  should  be  sent. 


418  ANDREW  JACKSON 

"  The  mission  of  Col.  Butler  having  failed,  I  then 
determined  to  use  my  influence,  after  the  battle  of  San 
Jacinto,  to  have  the  independence  of  Texas  acknow- 
ledged, and  to  receive  her  into  the  Union.  But  that 
arch  enemy,  J.  Q.  Adams,  rallied  all  his  forces  to  pre- 
vent its  annexation  to  the  U.  States  —  We  must  regain 
Texas ;  peacebly  if  we  can  ;  forcibly  if  we  must  /  .  .  . 
I  repeat  that  the  safety,  as  well  as  the  perpetuation  of 
our  glorious  Union  depends  upon  the  retrocession  of  the 
whole  of  that  country,  as  far  as  the  ancient  limits  of 
Louisiana,  to  the  U.  States." 1 

In  June,  1836,  Judge  Catron  wrote  to  Webster, 
from  Tennessee,  that  the  spirit  was  abroad  through 
the  whole  Mississippi  Valley  to  march  to  Texas.2 
Perhaps  the  disposition  to  march  was  not  so  strong 
elsewhere,  but  immense  speculations  in  land  had 
already  been  organized,  and  great  speculations  in 
Texan  3  securities  soon  after  began,  which  enlisted 
the  pecuniary  interests  of  great  numbers  of  people 
in  the  independence  of  Texas. 

A  correspondence  now  began  between  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  governments  of  the  United  States 
and  Mexico,  which  no  American  ought  to  read  with- 
out shame.  It  would  be  hard  to  find  an  equally 
gross  instance  of  bullying  on  the  part  of  a  large 
State  towards  a  small  one.  Jackson  had  ordered 


1  Ford  MSS. ;  Jackson  to  Lewis,  September  18,  1843. 

2  1  Webster's  Correspondence,  523. 

8  The  first  issue  of  Texan  bonds  was  authorized  in  November, 
1836.  The  first  Treasury  notes  were  issued  November  1,  1837. 
Gouge's  Texas,  57,  71. 


DEFINITION  OF  "TEXAS"  419 

that  General  Gaines  should  enter  the  territory  of 
Texas,  and  march  to  Nacogdoches,  if  he  thought 
that  there  was  any  danger  of  hostilities  on  the  part 
of  the  Indians,  and  if  there  was  suspicion  that  the 
Mexican  general  was  stirring  up  the  Indians  to  war 
on  the  United  States.  Here  we  have  another  re- 
miniscence of  Florida  revived.  Gaines  understood 
his  orders,  and  entered  the  Mexican  territory. 
Understanding  also,  no  doubt,  that  the  Jacksonian 
proceedings  of  1818  had  now  been  legitimized  as 
the  correct  American  line  of  procedure  for  a  mili- 
tary officer,  he  called  on  the  governors  of  the 
neighboring  States  for  militia.  Although  com- 
panies were  forming  and  marching  to  Texas  under 
full  organization,  this  "  call  "  was  overruled  by  the 
War  Department.  The  energetic  remonstrances 
of  the  Mexican  minister  finally  led  to  an  order  to 
Gaines  to  retire  from  Texan  territory,  not,  however, 
until  after  the  Mexican  minister  had  broken  off 
diplomatic  relations. 

In  July,  1836,  both  Houses  voted,  the  Senate 
unanimously,  that  the  independence  of  Texas  ought 
to  be  acknowledged  as  soon  as  Texas  had  proved 
that  she  could  maintain  it.  Texas  was  already 
represented  by  agents  applying  for  annexation. 
Jackson  recommended  longer  delay  in  a  message 
of  December  21,  1836.  The  fact  was  that  the 
geographical  definition  of  "Texas"  was  not  yet 
satisfactorily  established,  and  it  was  not  desirable 
to  have  annexation  settled  too  soon.  An  act  was 
passed  by  the  Legislature  of  Texas,  December  19, 


420  ANDREW  JACKSON 

1836,  by  which  the  Rio  Grande  was  declared  to  be 
the  western  boundary  of  Texas.  In  his  message 
of  December  22d,  Jackson  submitted  the  report 
of  his  agent  that  the  boundaries  of  Texast  before 
the  last  revolution,  were  the  Nueces,  the  Red,  and 
the  Sabine  rivers,  but  that  she  now  claimed  as  her 
boundary  the  Rio  del  Norte  to  its  source,  and  from 
that  point  eastward  and  southward  the  existing 
boundary  of  the  United  States.1  That  is  as  if 
Maine  should  secede  and  claim  that  her  boundaries 
were  the  Alleghanies  and  the  Potomac.  Jackson's 
message  distinctly  pointed  out  that  in  taking  Texas 
then,  or  later,  the  United  States  would  take  her 
with  her  new  boundary  claims.  That  is  as  if  Maine 
should  join  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  and  England 
should  set  up  a  claim  to  the  New  England  and 
Middle  States  based  on  the  "  declaration  "  of  Maine 
above  supposed.  The  policy  was  to  keep  the  Texas 
question  open  until  California  could  be  obtained. 
The  Mexican  war  ultimately  became  necessary  for 
that  purpose,  and  for  no  other  ;  for  Texas,  even  to 
the  Rio  Grande,  could  have  been  obtained  without 
it.2  Another  reason  for  delay  was  that  opposition 
to  the  annexation  of  Texas  had  been  aroused  in 
the  North,  and  there  was  not  yet  strength  enough 
to  carry  it.  May  25, 1836,  Adams  3  made  a  speech 
against  a  war  with  Mexico  to  conquer  Texas,  which 
had  great  influence  in  the  North. 

1  Document  L. 

2  3  Von  Hoist,  67,  81,  103,  108,  112;  Jay,  130. 
»  50  Niles,  276. 


DEFINITION  OF  "TEXAS"  421 

March  1,  1837,  the  Senate  recognized  the  inde- 
pendence of  Texas,  23  to  19.  The  House  did  not 
concur  in  full  form,  but  did  in  effect. 

In  1836  the  government  of  the  United  States 
opened  a  new  battery  against  that  of  Mexico  in  the 
shape  of  a  series  of  claims  and  charges.  The 
diplomatic  agent  of  the  former  power,  Powhatan 
Ellis,  performed  his  duties  in  such  a  rude  and  per- 
emptory manner  that  one  is  forced  to  suspect  that 
he  acted  by  orders,  especially  as  his  rank  was  only 
that  of  charge  d'affaires.  The  charges  were  at 
first  15  in  number,  then  46,  then  57.  They  were 
frivolous  and  forced,  and  bear  the  character  of 
attempts  to  make  a  quarrel.1  Ellis  abruptly  came 
home.  In  August,  1837,  the  agent  of  Texas, 
Memucan  Hunt,  made  a  formal  proposal  for  an- 
nexation. Van  Buren  declined  it.  Mexico  next 
proposed  a  new  negotiation,  with  arbitration  in 
regard  to  the  claims  and  charges  made  against  her 
by  the  United  States.  The  opposition  to  annexa- 
tion in  the  North  had  grown  so  strong  that  delay 
was  necessary,  and  negotiations  were  opened  which 
resulted  in  the  convention  of  August  17,  1840. 
Mexico  could  not  fulfil  the  engagements  she  en- 
tered into  in  that  treaty,  or  in  a  subsequent  one  of 
1843,  and  so  the  question  was  reopened,  and  finally 
was  manoauvred  into  a  war.  It  appears  that  Van 
Buren  had  the  feeling  which  any  President  will 
be  sure  to  have,  adverse  to  any  war  during  his 
administration.  The  Mexican  war  was  forced  on 

1  Jay,  36  et  seq. 


422  ANDREW  JACKSON 

by  a  cabinet  intrigue,  and  Tyler  forced  it  on 
Polk. 

The  Texas  intrigue  and  the  Mexican  war  were 
full  of  Jacksonian  acts  and  principles.  There  are 
constant  outcroppings  of  the  old  Seminole  war  pro- 
ceedings and  doctrines.  The  army  and  navy  were 
corrupted  by  swagger  and  insubordination,  and  by 
the  anxiety  of  the  officers  to  win  popularity  by  the 
methods  of  which  Jackson  had  set  the  example.1 
The  filibustering  spirit,  one  law  for  ourselves  and 
another  for  every  one  else,  gained  a  popularity  for 
which  Jackson  was  much  to  blame.  During  the 
Texas  intrigue,  Jackson  engaged  in  private  and 
personal  correspondence  on  public  questions  with 
diplomatic  agents,  who  were  not  always  accredited.2 

Briscoe  vs.  The  Bank  of  the  Commonwealth  of 
Kentucky.  —  In  1834  the  case  of  Briscoe  vs.  The 
Bank  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky  was  ar- 
gued before  the  Supreme  Court.3  Briscoe  and 
others  gave  a  note,  in  1830,  which  they  did  not 
pay  at  maturity.  In  the  State  Circuit  Court, 
Briscoe  pleaded  "  no  consideration,"  on  the  ground 
that  the  note  was  given  for  a  loan  of  notes  of  the 
Bank  of  the  Commonwealth,  which  were  "  bills  of 
credit "  within  the  prohibition  of  the  Constitution, 
and  therefore  of  no  value.  The  State  court  found 


1  In  1824  Commodore  Porter  was  guilty  of  an  outrage  at  Fo- 
xardo,  Porto  Rico.    When  court-martialled,  he  made  an  elaborate 
comparison  of  his  proceedings  with  those  of  Jackson  in  Florida, 
by  way  of  defence.    28  Niles,  370.     He  was  cashiered. 

2  11  Adams,  357.  8  8  Peters,  118. 


BRISCOE  VS.  BANK  423 

for  the  bank.  The  State  Court  of  Appeals  affirmed 
that  decision.  The  case  was  carried  to  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  on  a  writ  of  error.  The 
court  consisted,  in  1834,  of  Chief  Justice  Marshall, 
of  Virginia,  appointed  by  Adams  in  1801 ;  and 
Associate  Justices  Johnson,  of  South  Carolina,  ap- 
pointed by  Jefferson  in  1804 ;  Duvall,  of  Maryland, 
appointed  by  Madison  in  1811 ;  Story,  of  Massa- 
chusetts, appointed  in  the  same  year  by  the  same ; 
Thompson,  of  New  York,  appointed  by  Monroe  in 
1823  ;  McLean,  of  Ohio,  appointed  by  Jackson 
in  1829  ;  and  Baldwin,  of  Pennsylvania,  appointed 
by  Jackson  in  1830.  Johnson  was  absent  all  the 
term.  Duvall  was  absent  part  of  the  term.  Of 
the  five  who  heard  the  argument  in  Briscoe's  case, 
a  majority  thought  that  the  notes  of  the  Bank  of 
the  Commonwealth  were  bills  of  credit  under  the 
decision  in  Craig  vs.  Missouri,1  but  there  were  not 
four,  a  majority  of  the  whole,  who  concurred  in 
this  opinion.  The  rule  of  the  court  was,  not  to 
pronounce  a  State  law  invalid  for  unconstitution- 
ally unless  a  majority  of  the  whole  court  should 
concur.  Hence  no  decision  was  rendered. 

The  Circuit  Court  of  Mercer  County,  Kentucky, 
decided  in  1834,  under  the  decision  in  Craig  vs. 
Missouri,  that  the  notes  of  the  Bank  of  the  Com- 
monwealth were  bills  of  credit.2 

Judge  Johnson  died  in  1834.  Duvall  resigned 
in  January,  1835.  Wayne  took  his  seat  January 
14,  1835.  Hence  there  was  one  vacancy  in  1835, 

i  See  page  175.  2  46  NUes,  210. 


424  ANDREW  JACKSON 

and  Briscoe's  case  went  over.  Marshall  died  July 
6,  1835.  In  1836  there  were  only  five  judges  on 
the  bench  of  the  court.  Taney  was  confirmed 
March  15,  1836.  P.  P.  Barbour,  of  Virginia,  was 
confirmed  on  the  same  day.  This  made  the  court 
complete  again.  Three  changes  had  taken  place 
since  1834,  and  five  of  the  seven  judges  were  now 
Jackson's  appointees. 

Briscoe  vs.  The  Bank  was  decided  in  January, 
1837.  The  decision  was  by  McLean.  It  was  held 
that  a  bill  of  credit  "  is  a  paper  issued  by  the  sov- 
ereign power,  containing  a  pledge  of  its  faith  and 
designed  to  circulate  as  money."  Notes,  to  be  bills 
of  credit,  must  be  issued  by  the  State  and  bind 
the  faith  of  the  State.  Commissioners  of  issue 
must  not  impart  any  credit  by  signature,  nor  be 
responsible.  Hence  it  was  held  that  the  notes 
of  the  Bank  of  the  Commonwealth  were  not  bills  of 
credit.  Story  rendered  a  very  strong  and  unusu- 
ally eager  dissenting  opinion.  In  it  he  gave  a 
summary  history  and  analysis  of  "  bills  of  credit " 
as  they  existed  before  the  Revolution,  and  as  they 
were  understood  by  the  Constitution-makers.  He 
explicitly  referred  to  the  former  hearing  of  the 
case,  and  said  that  Marshall  had  been  in  the  ma- 
jority against  the  constitutionality  of  the  issues. 

The  decision  in  Briscoe's  case  marks  the  begin- 
ning of  a  new  era  in  the  history  of  the  constitu- 
tional law  of  the  United  States.  Up  to  that  time 
the  court  had  not  failed  to  pursue  the  organic  de- 
velopment of  the  Constitution,  and  it  had,  on  every 


DEFINITION  OF  BILLS  OF  CREDIT        425 

occasion  on  which  it  was  put  to  the  test,  proved 
the  bulwark  of  constitutional  liberty,  by  the  steadi- 
ness and  solidity  of  judgment  with  which  it  had 
established  the  interpretation  of  the  Constitution, 
and  checked  every  partial  and  interested  effort  to 
wrest  the  instrument  from  its  true  character.  Our 
children  are  familiarized,  in  their  school-books, 
with  the  names  of  statesmen  and  generals,  and 
popular  tradition  carries  forward  the  fame  of  men 
who  have  been  conspicuous  in  public  life ;  but  no 
one  who  really  knows  how  the  national  life  of  the 
United  States  has  developed  will  dispute  the  asser- 
tion, that  no  man  can  be  named  to  whom  the  nation 
is  more  indebted  for  solid  and  far-reaching  services 
than  it  is  to  John  Marshall.  The  proceedings  of 
the  Supreme  Court  are  almost  always  overlooked 
in  ordinary  narrations  of  history,  but  he  who  looks 
for  real  construction  or  growth  in  the  institutions 
of  the  country  should  look  to  those  proceedings 
first  of  all.  Especially  in  the  midst  of  a  surging 
democracy,  exposed  to  the  chicane  of  political 
mountebanks  and  the  devices  of  interested  cliques, 
the  firmness  and  correctness  with  which  the  court 
had  held  its  course  on  behalf  of  constitutional  lib- 
erty and  order  has  been  of  inestimable  value  to 
the  nation.  The  series  of  great  constitutional  de- 
cisions, to  which  reference  has  been  made  in  the 
preceding  pages,  have  now  entered  into  the  com- 
monplaces of  our  law.  They  have  been  tested 
through  three  quarters  of  a  century.  To  see  in 
the  retrospect  that  they  were  wise,  and  that  the 


426  ANDREW  JACKSON 

contrary  decisions  would  have  produced  mischief, 
is  one  thing ;  to  see  at  the  time,  in  the  heat  of  con- 
troversy and  under  the  clamor  of  interests,  what 
was  the  sound  and  correct  interpretation,  and  to 
pronounce  it  in  spite  of  abuse,  was  another  thing. 

In  Briscoe's  case  the  court  broke  the  line  of  its 
decisions,  and  made  the  prohibition  of  bills  of 
credit  nugatory.1  If  the  degree  of  responsibility 
and  independent  authority  which  the  directors  of 
the  Bank  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky  pos- 
sessed, and  the  amount  of  credit  they  gave  to  the 
notes,  aside  from  the  credit  of  the  State,  was  suf- 
ficient to  put  those  notes  outside  the  prohibition  of 
the  Constitution,  then  no  State  could  find  any 
difficulty  in  making  a  device  for  escaping  the 
constitutional  prohibition.  Wild-cat  banking  was 
granted  standing  ground  under  the  Constitution, 
and  the  boast  that  the  Constitutional  Convention 
had  closed  and  barred  the  door  against  the  paper 
money  with  which  the  colonies  had  been  cursed 
was  without  foundation.  The  great  "  banks  "  set 
up  by  the  southwestern  States  between  1335  and 
1837  were  protected  by  this  decision.  They  went 
on  their  course,  and  carried  those  States  down  to 
bankruptcy  and  repudiation.  The  wild-cat  bank- 
ing which  devastated  the  Ohio  States  between  1837 
and  1860,  and  miseducated  the  people  of  those 

1  "A  virtual  and  incidental  enforcement  of  the  depreciated 
notes  of  the  State  banks,  by  their  crowding  out  a  sound  medium, 
though  a  great  evil,  was  not  foreseen."  Madison  to  C.  J.  Inger* 
soil,  February  22,  1831 ;  4  Elliott,  641. 


EFFECT  ON  THE  COURT  427 

States  until  they  thought  irredeemable  government 
issues  an  unhoped-for  blessing,  never  could  have 
existed  if  Story's  opinion  had  been  law.  The  legal- 
tender  notes  of  1862,  and  the  decisions  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  on  the  constitutionality  of  the  legal- 
tender  act,  must  have  borne  an  entirely  different 
color,  if  Marshall's  opinion  had  prevailed  in  Bris- 
coe's  case. 

Jackson's  appointments  introduced  the  mode  of 
action  by  the  Executive,  through  the  selection  of 
the  judges,  on  the  interpretation  of  the  Constitu- 
tion by  the  Supreme  Court.  Briscoe's  case  marked 
the  victory  of  Kentucky  relief  finance  and  State 
rights  politics  over  the  judiciary.  The  effect  of 
political  appointments  to  the  bench  is  easily  trace- 
able, after  two  or  three  years,  in  the  reports,  which 
come  to  read  like  a  collection  of  old  stump  speeches. 
The  climax  of  the  tendency  which  Jackson  inau- 
gurated was  reached  when  the  court  went  to  pieces 
on  the  Dred  Scott  case,  trying  to  reach  a  decision 
which  should  be  politically  expedient,  rather  than 
one  which  should  be  legally  sound.  A  later  and 
similar  instance  is  furnished  by  the  legal-tender 
cases.  As  for  the  immediate  effect  of  Jackson's 
appointments,  it  may  be  most  decorously  stated 
by  quoting  from  Story's  reasons,  in  1845,  for  pro- 
posing to  resign :  "  I  have  been  long  convinced 
that  the  doctrines  and  opinions  of  the  old  court 
were  daily  losing  ground,  and  especially  those  on 
great  constitutional  questions.  New  men  and  new 
opinions  have  succeeded.  The  doctrines  of  the 


428  ANDREW  JACKSON 

Constitution,  so  vital  to  the  country,  which,  in  for- 
mer times,  received  the  support  of  the  whole  court, 
no  longer  maintain  their  ascendency.  I  am  the 
last  member  now  living  of  the  old  court,  and  I 
cannot  consent  to  remain  where  I  can  no  longer 
hope  to  see  those  doctrines  recognized  and  en- 
forced."1 

Civil  and  Social  Phenomena. — During  Jack- 
son's second  term  the  growth  of  the  nation  in 
wealth  and  prosperity  was  very  great.  It  is  plain, 
from  the  history  we  have  been  pursuing,  that,  in 
spite  of  all  the  pettiness  and  provincialism  which 
marked  political  controversies,  the  civil  life  of  the 
nation  was  growing  wider  and  richer.  It  was 
just  because  there  was  an  immeasurable  source  of 
national  life  in  the  physical  circumstances,  and  in 
the  energy  of  the  people,  that  the  political  follies 
and  abuses  could  be  endured.  If  the  politicians 
and  statesmen  would  only  let  the  nation  alone  it 
would  go  on,  not  only  prosperously,  but  smoothly ; 
that  is  why  the  non-interference  dogma  of  the 
democrats,  which  the  whigs  denounced  as  non- 
government, was  in  fact  the  highest  political  wis- 
dom. On  reflection  it  will  not  be  found  strange 
that  the  period  1829  to  1837  should  have  been 
marked  by  a  great  deal  of  violence  and  turbulence. 
It  is  not  possible  that  a  growing  nation  should 
spread  over  new  territory,  and  feel  the  thrill  of 
its  own  young  energies  contending  successfully 
with  nature  in  all  her  rude  force,  without  social 

i  2  Story's  Story,  527. 


VIOLENCE  429 

commotions  and  a  certain  recklessness  and  uproar. 
The  contagion  of  these  forms  of  disorder  produces 
other  and  less  excusable  forms.  On  account  of 
the  allowance  to  be  made  for  violence  and  lawless- 
ness under  the  circumstances,  and  also  on  account 
of  the  disagreeableness  of  recalling,  if  it  can  be 
avoided,  old  follies,  no  recapitulation  of  the  out- 
rages, mobs,  riots,  etc.,  of  the  period  will  here  be 
attempted.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  they  were  worse 
and  more  numerous  than  either  before  or  since. 
Brawls  and  duels  between  congressmen,  and  as- 
saults on  congressmen  by  persons  who  considered 
themselves  aggrieved  by  words  spoken  in  debate, 
were  very  frequent  at  Washington.  The  cities 
possessed,  as  yet,  no  police.  The  proposition  to 
introduce  police  was  resented  as  an  assault  on 
liberty.  Rowdies,  native  Americans,  protestants, 
firemen,  anti-abolitionists,  trades-unionists,  anti- 
bank  men,  etc.,  etc.,  in  turn  produced  riots  in  the 
streets  of  the  great  eastern  cities.  From  the 
South  came  hideous  stories  of  burning  negroes, 
hanging  abolitionists,  and  less  heinous  violence 
against  the  mails.  From  Charlestown,  Massachu- 
setts, came  the  story  of  the  cruel  burning  of  a 
convent.  Niles,  in  August,  1835,  gathered  three 
pages  of  reports  of  recent  outrages  against  law  and 
order.1  A  month  later  he  has  another  catalogue, 
and  he  exclaims  in  astonishment  that  the  world 
seems  upside  down.2  The  fashion  of  the  time 
seemed  to  be  to  pass  at  once  from  the  feeling  to 
1  48  Niles,  439.  2  49  Nilea,  49. 


430  ANDREW  JACKSON 

the  act.  That  Jackson's  character  and  example 
had  done  something  to  set  this  fashion  is  hardly 
to  be  denied.  Harriet  Martineau  and  Richard 
Cobden,  both  friendly  critics,  were  shocked  and 
disappointed  at  the  social  condition.  Adams,  in 
1834,  wrote  thus :  "  The  prosperity  of  the  coun- 
try, independent  of  all  agency  of  the  government, 
is  so  great  that  the  people  have  nothing  to  disturb 
them  but  their  own  waywardness  and  corruption. 
They  quarrel  upon  dissensions  of  a  doit,  and  split 
up  in  gangs  of  partisans  of  A,  B,  and  C,  without 
knowing  why  they  prefer  one  to  another.  Cau- 
cuses, county,  State,  and  national  conventions, 
public  dinners  and  dinner-table  speeches,  two  or 
three  hours  long,  constitute  the  operative  power 
of  electioneering ;  and  the  parties  are  of  working 
men,  temperance  reformers,  anti-masons,  Union 
and  State  rights  men,  nullifiers,  and,  above  all, 
Jackson  men,  Van  Buren  men,  Clay  men,  Calhoun 
men,  Webster  men,  and  McLean  men,  whigs  and 
tories,  republicans  and  democrats,  without  one 
ounce  of  honest  principle  to  choose  between 
them."1  In  his  long  catalogue  he  yet  omitted 
abolitionists  and.  native  Americans,  the  latter  of 
^hom  began  to  be  heard  of  as  soon  as  foreign  im- 
migration became  great.  Great  parties  did  not 
organize  on  the  important  political  questions. 
Men  were  led  off  on  some  petty  side  issue,  or  they 
attached  themselves  to  a  great  man,  with  whom 
they  hoped  to  come  to  power.  The  zeal  of  these 
i  9  Adams,  187. 


ATTEMPTED  ASSASSINATION  OF  JACKSON    431 

little  cliques  was  astonishing.  One  feels  that  there 
must  have  been  a  desire  to  say  to  them :  No  doubt 
the  thing  you  have  taken  up  as  your  hobby  is  fairly 
important,  but  why  get  so  excited  about  it,  and  why 
not  pursue  your  reformatory  and  philanthropic 
work  outside  of  politics  ?  Why  not  go  about  your 
proposed  improvement  soberly  and  in  due  measure  ? 
The  truth  was  that  nearly  all  the  cliques  wanted 
to  reach  their  object  by  the  short  cut  of  legislation, 
that  is,  to  force  other  people  to  do  what  they  were 
convinced  it  was  a  wise  thing  to  do,  and  a  great 
many  of  them  also  wanted  to  make  political  capi- 
tal out  of  their  "  causes."  There  was  something 
provincial  about  the  gossip  and  news-mongering 
over  small  things,  and  about  the  dinners  and  ova- 
tions to  fourth-rate  men.  One  wonders  if  the 
people  had  not  enough  interesting  things  to  occupy 
them.  They  could  not  have  been  very  busy  or 
hard-worked,  if  they  had  time  to  spend  on  all 
these  things.  There  was  something  bombastic,  too, 
about  the  way  in  which  an  orator  took  up  a  trifle. 
Everything  in  the  surroundings  forced  him  to  be 
inflated  and  meretricious,  in  order  to  swell  up  to 
the  dimensions  of  the  occasion  the  trifle  with  which 
he  was  forced  to  deal.  At  the  same  time  serious 
things,  like  nullification,  were  treated  by  the  same 
inflated  method,  which  made  them  ridiculous.  On 
every  occasion  of  general  interest  the  people  ran 
together  for  a  public  meeting.  Their  method  of 
doing  their  thinking  on  any  topic  seemed  to  be  to 
hear  some  speeches  about  it.  No  doubt  this  was 


432  ANDREW  JACKSON 

one  reason  why  there  was  so  much  heat  mixed  up 
with  all  opinons.  The  prevailing  disposition  to 
boast,  and  the  over-sensitiveness  to  foreign  criti- 
cism which  was  manifested,  were  additional  symp- 
toms of  immaturity. 

January  30,  1835,1  Jackson  attended  the  fune- 
ral, at  the  Capitol,  of  Warren  R.  Davis,  of  South 
Carolina.  As  he  came  out  through  the  rotunda, 
a  man  named  Richard  Lawrence  snapped  two  pis, 
tols  in  succession  at  him.  Neither  was  discharged. 
Lawrence  gave  half  a  dozen  inconsistent  reasons 
for  the  act.  He  was  plainly  insane.  Jackson  im- 
mediately gave  the  attack  a  political  significance. 
Some  days  after  it  occurred,  Harriet  Martineau 
called  upon  him,  and  referred  to  the  "  insane  at- 
tempt." "  He  protested,  in  the  presence  of  many 
strangers,  that  there  was  no  insanity  in  the  case. 
I  was  silent,  of  course.  He  protested  that  there 
was  a  plot,  and  that  the  man  was  a  tool."  2  He 
went  so  far  as  to  name  senator  Poindexter,  of 
Mississippi,  as  the  instigator.  He  was  at  feud 
with  Poindexter,  although  the  latter  had  been  with 
him  at  New  Orleans,  and  had  defended  him  in 
Congress  in  the  Seminole  war  affair.  Harriet 
Martineau  says  that  it  was  expected  at  Washing- 
ton that  they  would  have  a  duel  as  soon  as  Jack- 
son's term  was  out.  This  was  probably  based  on 
a  reputed  speech  of  Poindexter,  to  which  the 

1  47  Niles,  340  ;  1  Tyler's  Tylers,  508. 

2  1  Martineau,  Western  Travel,  162.    She  was  in  the  Capitol 
when  the  attack  occurred. 


THE  EQUAL  RIGHTS  PARTY  433 

"  Globe  "  gave  currency.1  That  paper,  nearly  a 
month  after  the  attempted  assassination,  treated 
the  charge  against  Poindexter  as  not  at  all  incredi- 
ble. Poindexter  obtained  an  investigation  by  the 
Senate,  when  the  charge  was,  of  course,  easily 
proved  to  rest  upon  the  most  frivolous  and  un- 
trustworthy assertions,  no  one  of  which  would  bear 
the  slightest  examination,  and  some  of  which  were 
distinctly  false.  The  incident,  however,  illustrated 
one  trait  of  Jackson's  character,  which  has  been 
noted  several  times  before.  The  most  extravagant 
and  baseless  suspicion  of  a  personal  enemy,  in  con- 
nection with  an  injury  to  himself,  struck  his  mind 
with  such  a  degree  of  self-evident  truth  that  exter- 
nal evidence  to  the  contrary  had  no  influence  on 
him.  In  the  present  case,  this  fault  laid  him  open 
to  a  charge  of  encouraging  persons  who  had  com- 
mitted perjury,  and  had  suborned  2  others  to  do  so. 
Lawrence,  on  his  trial,  continually  interrupted  the 
proceedings.  He  was  acquitted,  and  remanded  to 
custody  as  an  insane  person. 

The  Equal  Eights  Party  or  Loco-focos.  —  A 
faction  arose  in  New  York  city  in  1834-35,  which 
called  itself  the  "  equal  rights  party,"  or  the 
"  Jeffersonian  anti-monopolists."  The  organiza- 
tion of  the  Tammany  Hall  democrats,  under  Van 
Buren  and  the  regency,  had  become  rigid  and 
tyrannical.  The  equal  rights  faction  revolted,  and 
declared  that  Tammany  was  aristocratic.  They 
represented  a  new  upheaval  of  democracy.  They 
i  48  Niles,  33.  2  9  Adams,  229. 


434  ANDREW  JACKSON 

took  literally  the  dogmas  which  had  been  taught 
them,  just  as  the  original  Jackson  men  had  done 
ten  years  before,  only  that  now,  to  them,  the  Jack- 
son party  seated  in  power  seemed  to  have  drifted 
away  from  the  pure  principles  of  democracy,  just 
as  Monroe  had  once  appeared  to  the  Jackson  men 
to  have  done.  The  equal  rights  men  wanted  "  to 
return  to  the  Jeffersonian  fountain"  again,  and 
make  some  new  deductions.  They  revived  and 
extended  the  old  doctrines  which  Duane,  of  the 
*'  Aurora,"  taught  at  the  beginning  of  the  century 
in  his  "  Politics  for  Farmers,"  and  similar  pam- 
phlets. In  general  the  doctrines  and  propositions 
might  be  described  as  an  attempt  to  apply  the  pro- 
cedure of  a  township  democracy  to  a  great  state. 
The  equal  rights  men  held  meetings  at  first  se- 
cretly, at  four  different  places,  and  not  more  than 
two  successive  times  at  the  same  place.1  They 
were,  in  a  party  point  of  view,  conspirators,  rebels, 
—  "  disorganizes,"  in  short ;  and  they  were  plotting 
the  highest  crime  known  to  the  political  code  in 
which  they  had  been  educated,  and  which  they 
accepted.  Their  platform  was  :  No  distinction  be- 
tween men  save  merit ;  gold  and  silver  the  only 
legitimate  and  proper  circulating  medium ;  no 
perpetuities  or  monopolies  ;  strict  construction  of 
the  Constitution ;  no  bank  charters  by  States  (be- 
cause banks  of  issue  favor  gambling,  and  are  "  cal- 
culated to  build  up  and  strengthen  in  our  country 
the  odious  distribution  of  wealth  and  power  against 
i  Byrdsall,  16. 


THE  "LOCO-FOCOS"  435 

merits  and  equal  rights  ")  ;  approval  of  Jackson's 
administration ;  election  of  President  by  direct 
popular  vote.  They  favored  the  doctrine  of  in- 
structions. They  also  advocated  free  trade  and 
direct  taxes.1  They  had  some  very  sincere  and 
pure-minded  men  among  them,  a  large  number  of 
over-heated  brains,  and  a  still  larger  number  of 
demagogues,  who  were  seeking  to  organize  the  fac- 
tion as  a  means  of  making  themselves  so  valuable 
that  the  regular  managers  would  buy  them.  The 
equal  rights  men  gained  strength  so  rapidly  that, 
on  the  29th  of  October,  1835,  they  were  able  to 
offer  battle  to  the  old  faction  at  a  primary  meeting 
in  Tammany  Hall,  for  the  nomination  of  a  con- 
gressman and  other  officers.  The  "regular" 
party  entered  the  hall  by  the  back  entrance,  and 
organized  the  meeting  before  the  doors  were 
opened.  The  anti-monopolists  poured  in,  nomi- 
nated a  chairman  and  elected  him,  ignoring  the 
previous  organization.  The  question  of  "  equal 
rights"  between  the  two  chairmen  was  then  set- 
tled in  the  old  original  method  which  has  prevailed 
ever  since  there  has  been  life  on  earth.  The  equal 
rights  men  dispossessed  the  other  faction  by  force, 
and  so  proved  the  justice  of  their  principles.  The 
non-equal  rights  party  then  left  the  hall,  but  they 
"  caused  "  the  equal  rights  men  "  to  be  subjected 
to  a  deprivation  of  the  right "  to  light  by  turning 
out  the  gas.  The  equal  rights  men  were  thus 
forced  to  test  that  theory  of  natural  rights  which 
1  Byrdsall,  103. 


436  ANDREW  JACKSON 

affirms  that  said  rights  are  only  the  chance  to  have 
good  things,  if  one  can  get  them.  In  spite  of  their 
dogma  of  the  equality  of  all  men,  which  would 
make  a  prudent  man  no  better  than  a  careless  one, 
and  a  man  with  capital  no  better  than  one  with- 
out capital,  the  equal  rights  men  had  foreseen 
the  emergency,  and  had  provided  themselves  with 
capital  in  the  shape  of  candles  and  loco-f  oco  matches. 
They  thus  established  their  right  to  light,  against 
nature  and  against  their  enemies.  They  duly 
adopted  their  platform,  nominated  a  ticket,  and 
adjourned.  The  regular  leaders  met  elsewhere, 
nominated  the  ticket  which  they  had  previously 
prepared,  and  dispensed,  for  that  occasion,  with 
the  ornamental  and  ceremonious  formality  of  a 
primary  meeting  to  nominate  it. 

On  the  next  day  the  "  Courier  and  Enquirer " 
dubbed  the  equal  rights  party  the  loco-focos,  and 
the  name  clung  to  them.1  Hammond  quotes  a 
correspondent 2  who  correctly  declared  that  "  the 
workingmen's  party  and  the  equal  rights  party 
have  operated  as  causes,  producing  effects  that 
will  shape  the  course  of  the  two  great  parties  of 
the  United  States,  and  consequently  the  destinies 
of  this  great  republic."  The  faction,  at  least  in 
its  better  elements,  evidently  had  convictions  and 
a  programme.  It  continued  to  grow.  The  "  Even- 
ing Post "  became  its  organ.  That  paper  quarrelled 
with  the  administration  on  Kendall's  order  about 
the  mails,  and  was  thereupon  formally  read  out  of 
1  49  NUes,  162.  2  2  Hammond,  503. 


INFLUENCE  OF  THE  LOCO-FOCOS         437 

the  party  by  the  "  Globe."  1  The  loco-focos  ceased 
to  be  a  revolting  faction.  They  acquired  belliger- 
ent rights.  The  faction,  however,  in  its  internal 
economy  ran  the  course  of  all  factions.  It  went 
to  extremes,  and  then  began  to  split  up.  In  Jan- 
uary, 1836,  it  declared  its  independence  of  the 
democratic-republican  party.  This  alienated  all 
who  hated  the  party  tyranny,  but  who  wanted  re- 
form in  the  party.  The  faction  declared  itself 
opposed  to  all  acts  of  incorporation,  and  held  that 
all  such  acts  were  repealable.  It  declared  that 
representative  institutions  were  only  a  practical 
convenience,  and  that  Legislatures  could  not  cre- 
ate vested  rights.2  Then  it  went  on  to  adopt  a 
platform  of  "equality  of  position,  as  well  as  of 
rights." 

In  October,  1836,  Tammany  made  overtures  to 
the  equal  rights  men  for  a  reunion,  in  preparation 
for  the  presidential  election.  Some  of  the  loco-focos 
wanted  to  unite  ;  others  refused.  The  latter  were 
the  men  of  conviction ;  the  former  were  the  traders. 
The  former  called  the  latter  u  rumps ;  "  the  latter 
called  the  former  "  buffaloes."  3  Only  one  stage 
now  remained  to  complete  the  old  and  oft-repeated 
drama  of  faction.  A  man  named  Slamm,  a  blatant 
ignoramus,  who,  to  his  great  joy,  had  been  arrested 
by  order  of  the  Assembly  of  New  York  for  con- 
tempt and  breach  of  privilege,  and  who  had  pro- 
fited to  the  utmost  by  this  incident  to  make  a  long 
w  argument  "  against  the  "  privilege  "  of  an  Ameri- 

1  49  Niles,  78.  2  Byrdsall,  41.  «  Byrdsall,  178. 


438  ANDREW  JACKSON 

can  Legislature,  and  to  pose  as  a  martyr  to  equal 
rights,  secured  his  own  election  to  the  position  of 
secretary  of  the  equal  rights  party.  He  then  se- 
cured a  vote  that  no  constitutional  election  could 
be  held  unless  called  by  the  secretary.  He  never 
would  call  one.  There  were  those  who  thought 
that  he  sold  out  the  party. 

Thus  the  faction  perished  ignominiously,  but  it 
was  not  without  reason  that  its  name  passed,  a 
little  later,  to  the  whole  Jackson -Van  Buren 
party  ;  i.  e.,  to  the  radical  anti-paper  currency,  not 
simply  anti-United  States  Bank,  wing  of  the  na- 
tional democratic  party.  The  equal  rights  men 
maintained  impracticable  doctrines  of  civil  au- 
thority, and  fantastic  dogmas  about  equality,  but 
when  these  were  stripped  away  there  remained  in 
their  platform  sound  doctrines  and  imperishable 
ideas.  They  first  put  the  democratic  party  on 
the  platform  which  for  five  or  six  years  it  had 
been  trying  to  find.  When  it  did  find  that  plat- 
form it  was  most  true  to  itself,  and  it  contributed 
most  to  the  welfare  of  the  country.  The  demo- 
cratic party  was  for  a  generation,  by  tradition,  a 
party  of  hard  money,  free  trade,  the  non-inter- 
ference theory  of  government,  and  no  special 
legislation.  If  that  tradition  be  traced  up  to  its 
source,  it  will  lead  back,  not  to  the  Jackson  party 
of  1829,  but  to  the  loco-focos  of  1835. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

THE  ELECTION  OF  1836. — END  OF  JACKSON'S 
CAREER 

THE  attempt  was  made  in  1834  to  unite  and 
organize  the  whole  opposition  to  Jackson.  Niles 
first  mentions  the  party  name  "whig"  in  April, 
1834.1  He  says  that  it  had  come  into  use  in  Con- 
necticut and  New  York.  It  was  adopted  with  an- 
tagonistic reference  to  the  high  prerogative  and 
(as  alleged)  tory  doctrines  of  Jackson.  The  anti- 
masons  and  national  republicans  ultimately  merged 
in  the  new  whig  party,  but  time  was  required  to 
bring  about  that  result.  In  1834  it  was  impos- 
sible. The  anti-masons  insisted  on  acting  inde- 
pendently. Their  candidate  for  President  then 
was  Francis  Granger.2  Clay  would  not  run  in 
1836,  because  he  could  not  unite  the  opposition, 
He  was  disgusted  with  public  life,  and  desired  to 
retire.3 

The  administration  party,  on  the  other  hand, 
was  perfectly  organized.  The  corps  of  federal 
office-holders  had  been  drilled  by  the  "Globe" 
into  thorough  discipline  and  perfect  accord  of 
energy  and  will.  Each  officer  was  held  to  "  revere 

i  46  Niles,  101.  2  50  Niles,  234.  »  9  Adams,  170. 


440  ANDREW  JACKSON 

• 

the  chief,"  and  to  act  in  obedience  to  the  indica- 
tions of  his  will  which  caine  through  the  "  Globe." 
They  did  so.  There  was  no  faltering.  There  was 
only  zealous  obedience.  It  caused  some  bewilder- 
ment to  remember  that  this  was  the  party  which 
had  denounced  Adams  for  using  the  federal  officers 
to  electioneer.  Lewis  had  been  known  to  interfere 
directly  in  elections,  and  Blair  had  done  the  same 
in  his  private  capacity.1  The  party  had  been 
wonderfully  held  together.  In  1830  there  were 
only  four  anti-Jackson  Legislatures  in  the  Union, 
namely,  in  Vermont,  Massachusetts,  Connecticut, 
and  Delaware.  In  the  six  years  from  1830  to 
1835,  both  inclusive,  twenty-seven  States  held  162 
sessions  of  their  Legislatures.  Of  these,  118  had 
Jackson  majorities,  40  anti-Jackson,  and  4  Cal- 
houn.2  There  was  some  talk  of  a  third  term  for 
Jackson,  but  it  never  grew  strong.  The  precedents 
were  cited  against  it.  Jackson's  bad  health  and 
Van  Buren's  aspirations  were  perhaps  stronger  ob- 
jections. Adams  says  that  Jackson  had  "  wearied 
out  the  sordid  subserviency  of  his  supporters."8 
That  is  not  at  all  improbable. 

The  democratic  convention  was  held  at  Balti- 
more, May  20, 1835.  Jackson  had  written  to  Ten- 
nessee, recommending  that  a  convention  should  be 
held  of  "  candidates  fresh  from  the  people."  There 
were  not  wanting  those  who  called  this  convention 
a  caucus,  and  said  that  it  was  the  old  congressional 
monster  in  a  new  mask.  Tennessee  did  not  send 
l  40  NUes,  299.  2  63  Niles,  308.  8  9  Adams,  312. 


DEMOCRATIC   CONVENTION  — 1835         441 

any  delegates.  Even  Jackson  could  not  bring  that 
State  to  support  Van  Buren.  Tennessee  was  a  whig 
State  until  1856.  Her  hostility  to  Van  Buren  was 
adroitly  combined  with  that  of  Pennsylvania,  in 
1844,  by  the  selection  of  Polk  as  a  candidate,  to 
defeat  Van  Buren  ;  otherwise  stated,  it  was  the 
desire  to  combine  these  two  States,  in  order  to  de- 
feat Van  Buren,  which  led  to  the  nomination  of 
Polk.  In  1835  a  caucus  of  the  New  Hampshire 
Legislature,  which  nominated  Hill  for  Governor, 
passed  a  resolution  begging  Tennessee  not  to  divide 
the  party.1  Tennessee,  however,  had  another  very 
popular  candidate,  Hugh  L.  White,  a  former  friend 
of  Jackson,  whom  Jackson  now  hated  as  a  traitor 
and  renegade.2  John  Bell,  the  Speaker,  was  a 
supporter  of  White,  and  he  and  his  friends  claimed 
that  they  were  not  in  opposition  ;  that  they  and 
White  were  good  republicans,  and  that  they  pre- 
ferred White  to  the  man  whom  Jackson  had  se- 
lected.3 The  "  Globe  "  attacked  Bell  with  bitter- 
ness. Jackson  was  greatly  enraged,  and  exerted 
himself  personally  and  directly  against  White.4 
One  Tennessee  man,  being  in  Baltimore  when  the 
convention  was  held,  took  upon  himself  to  repre- 
sent that  State.  His  name  was  Rucker,  and  to 
"  ruckerize  "  passed  into  the  political  slang  of  the 
day,  meaning  to  assume  functions  without  creden- 
tials. 

The  Baltimore  convention  was  largely  composed 

l  48  Niles,  322.  2  See  page  212. 

8  Bell's  speech  in  48  Niles,  334.  4  49  Niles,  35. 


442  ANDREW  JACKSON 

of  office-holders.  Twenty-one  States  were  repre- 
sented.1 Andrew  Stevenson,  of  Virginia,  was  chair- 
man. The  two-thirds  rule  was  adopted,  because 
Van  Buren  was  sure  of  two  thirds.  He  actually 
got  a  unanimous  vote,  265.  For  Vice-President, 
K.  M.  Johnson,  of  Kentucky,  got  178  votes  ;  W.  C. 
Rives,  of  Virginia,  87.  The  Virginia  delegation 
declared,  on  the  floor  of  the  convention,  that  Vir- 
ginia would  never  vote  for  Johnson,  because  he 
favored  tariff,  bank,  and  internal  improvements, 
and  because  they  had  no  confidence  in  his  prin- 
ciples or  character.2  Van  Buren,  in  his  letter  of 
acceptance,3  said  that  he  had  been  mentioned  as 
Jackson's  successor  "more  through  the  ill-will  of 
opponents  than  the  partiality  of  friends."  That 
statement  was  so  adroit  that  it  would  take  a  page 
to  tell  whether  it  was  true  or  not.  He  made  a  full 
and  eager  declaration  that  he  had  asked  for  no 
man's  support.  He  said  that  he  would  "  endeavor 
to  tread  generally  in  the  footsteps  of  President 
Jackson,  —  happy  if  I  shall  be  able  to  perfect  the 
work  which  he  has  so  gloriously  begun."  Johnson, 
in  his  letter  of  acceptance,4  declared  that  he  was 
opposed  to  the  old  Bank,  or  to  one  like  it,  but 
thought  that  such  a  bank  as  Jackson  talked  of  in 
his  earliest  messages  might  be  a  good  thing.  On 
tariff  and  internal  improvements  he  said  that  he 
agreed  with  Jackson.  Van  Buren  was  fifty-four 
years  of  age  and  Johnson  fifty-six.  Johnson  had 

i  48  Niles,  207,  227,  244.         2  Ibid.  248. 
»  Ibid.  257.  *  Ibid.  329. 


CANDIDATES  AND  PLATFORMS  — 1836     443 

been  in  Congress  ever  since  1807,  except  during 
the  second  war  with  England,  when  he  took  the 
field.  He  served  with  some  distinction,  but  a 
ridiculous  attempt  to  credit  him  with  the  killing 
of  Tecumseh  has  caused  his  real  merits  to  be  for- 
gotten. As  a  public  man  he  managed  to  be  as 
near  as  possible  to  the  head  of  every  popular  move- 
ment, and  to  get  his  name  connected  with  it,  but 
he  never  contributed  assistance  to  any  public  busi- 
ness. His  name  is  also  met  with  frequently  as  a 
messenger,  middle-man,  manipulator,  and  general 
efficiency  man  of  the  Jackson  party.  He  made  a 
report,  in  1829,  on  the  question  of  running  the 
mails  on  Sunday,  which  was  one  of  his  claims  to 
fame.  It  was  written  for  him  by  the  Rev.  O.  B. 
Brown.1  A  chance  was  found  in  this  report  to 
utter  some  noble  sentiments  on  religious  liberty, 
and  to  lay  down  some  specifications  of  American 
principles  in  that  regard  which  were  not  likely  to 
provoke  contradiction.  This  valuable  production 
was  printed  on  cloth,  and  hung  up  in  stage  offices 
and  bar-rooms  all  over  the  country.  Johnson  had 
nourished  presidential  aspirations  for  some  years. 
He  did  not  abandon  them  till  1844. 

The  anti-Jackson  men,  in  1834-35,  were  opposed, 
on  principle,  to  a  national  convention.  They  said 
that  the  convention  was  King  Caucus  revived. 
The  anti-masons  held  a  State  convention  at  Harris- 
burg,  December  16,  1835.2  It  was  decided  not  to 

1  See  page  409.    Kendall's  Autobiography,  107. 

2  49  Niles,  265,  287. 


M4  ANDREW  JACKSON 

call  a  national  convention.  They  thought  the  free 
action  of  the  people  would  be  best  brought  out  by 
State  conventions.  They  nominated  William  H. 
Harrison  by  89  votes  to  29  for  Webster  and  3  for 
Granger.  For  Vice-President,  Granger  got  102 
votes ;  Hugh  L.  White,  5 ;  William  Slade,  of  Ver- 
mont, 5 ;  and  William  A.  Palmer,  of  Vermont,  7. 
The  whigs  of  Pennsylvania  adopted  the  nomina- 
tions of  the  anti-masons,  and  coalesced  with  them. 
Webster  was  very  anxious,  at  this  time,  to  be 
nominated  and  supported  by  the  whigs.  It  pleases 
some  people  to  think  that  Webster  ought  not  to 
have  had  this  ambition.  He  was  a  strange  com- 
pound of  the  greatest  powers  and  some  mean  traits. 
To  such  a  man  the  presidential  ambition  is  very 
sure  to  mean  moral  shipwreck.  Still  it  was  not 
wrong  for  Webster  to  want  the  proofs  of  success 
in  his  career.  His  dissatisfaction  was  well  founded 
when,  after  his  splendid  services,  he  saw  William 
Henry  Harrison  preferred  before  him ;  and  it  is  a 
point  which  deserves  careful  attention,  that,  if 
Webster's  just  ambition  had  been  fairly  gratified, 
he  would  have  been  a  better  man.  He  was  nomi- 
nated by  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts. 

Hugh  L.  White,  of  Tennessee,  was  nominated 
by  the  Legislatures  of  Alabama,  Tennessee,  and 
Illinois.  Judge  McLean  was  nominated  in  Ohio. 
He  had  had  presidential  aspirations  ever  since 
1828.1  The  Northern  whigs  supported  Harrison, 
and  the  Southern  whigs  supported  White.  Thus 
1  Kendall's  Autobiography,  304. 


ADMISSION   OF  MICHIGAN  445 

the  opposition  went  into  the  campaign  disorganized 
and  devoted  to  defeat.  When  we  consider  the 
earnestness  with  which  they  all  opposed  Jackson 
and  Jacksonisni,  and  also  the  demonstration  they 
had  suffered,  in  1832,  of  the  consequences  of  divi- 
sion and  tactical  imbecility,  it  is  amazing  that 
they  should  have  entered  upon  another  campaign 
so  divided  and  discordant  as  to  be  defeated  before 
they  began. 

Harrison  and  White  were  of  the  same  age,  sixty- 
three.  Harrison  was  a  man  of  no  education.  He 
had  done  some  good  service  as  an  Indian  fighter. 
The  anti-Jackson  men,  who  had  derided  Jackson's 
candidature  because  he  was  not  a  statesman,  se- 
lected, in  Harrison,  the  man  nearest  like  him 
whom  they  could  find.  They  hoped  to  work  up  a 
popularity  for  him  on  the  model  of  Jackson's  popu- 
larity.1 Harrison  answered  the  anti-masons  that 
he  was  not  a  mason,  and  did  not  like  masonry,  but 
that  the  federal  government  had  nothing  to  do 
with  that  subject.  This  did  not  satisfy  Thaddeus 
Stevens,  who  wanted  Webster.2  White  has  been 
mentioned  several  times.  He  had  a  fair  education 
and  a  good  character,  and  he  was  very  much  re- 
spected, but  he  was  a  person  of  only  ordinary 
ability. 

During  the  winter  of  1835-36  there  was  a  great 
struggle  in  the  House  over  a  contested  election  in 

1  For  an  estimate  of  Harrison,  written  in  1828,  which,  is  perhaps 
too  highly  colored  to  quote,  see  7  Adams,  530. 

2  9  Adams,  273. 


446  ANDREW  JACKSON 

North  Carolina.  It  was  thought  very  probable 
that  the  presidential  election  might  be  thrown  into 
the  House,  and  the  vote  of  North  Carolina  might 
decide  the  result.  The  sitting  member  (Graham) 
was  unseated,  and  the  case  was  referred  back  for 
a  new  election. 

There  were  two  States  whose  admission  was 
pending  when  the  election  approached,  —  Arkansas 
and  Michigan.  In  1835  Michigan  became  involved 
in  a  boundary  dispute  with  Ohio.  The  act  which 
organized  the  territory  of  Michigan,  January  11, 
1805,  described,  as  its  southern  boundary,  a  due 
east  and  west  line  running  through  the  southern- 
most point  of  Lake  Michigan.  The  Constitution 
of  Ohio  gave  that  State,  as  its  northern  boundary, 
a  line  drawn  from  the  southernmost  point  of  Lake 
Michigan  to  the  northernmost  cape  of  Maurnee 
Bay.  Indiana's  northern  boundary  had  been  de- 
scribed as  a  due  east  and  west  line  ten  miles  north 
of  the  southernmost  point  of  Lake  Michigan.  The 
northern  boundary  of  Illinois  had  been  placed  on 
the  parallel  of  42°  30'.  Michigan,  therefore,  found 
her  territory  reduced.  Jackson,  at  first,  on  the 
advice  of  Butler,  the  Attorney-General,  took  the 
side  of  Michigan.  The  people  of  Michigan  held  a 
convention  in  September,  1835,  and  framed  a  Con- 
stitution, which  was  to  go  into  effect  in  November. 
In  October,  the  Assistant  Secretary  of  State,  As- 
bury  Dickens,  wrote,  at  the  President's  orders, 
that  no  such  reorganization  of  the  government 
could  take  place  without  the  consent  of  Congress. 


THE  VOTE  OF  1836  447 

It  was  a  case  of  squatterism.1  In  1835-36  there 
was  some  danger  of  an  armed  collision  between 
Ohio  and  Michigan ;  but  it  is  not  easy,  on  account 
of  the  rhetoric  which  was  then  in  fashion,  to 
judge  how  great  this  danger  was.  June  15,  1836, 
Arkansas  and  Michigan  were  admitted  together; 
but  Michigan  was  put  under  the  condition  that  she 
must  accept  the  southern  boundary  which  would 
result  from  the  northern  lines  of  Indiana  and 
Ohio,  and  accept  compensation  on  the  peninsula 
north  of  Lake  Michigan.2  The  Legislature  of 
Michigan,  in  July,  called  a  convention,  which  met 
September  26th,  and  rejected  the  condition.  On 
the  5th  and  6th  of  December,  by  the  spontaneous 
action  of  the  people,  delegates  were  elected  to  a 
convention,  which  met  December  14,  1836,  and 
assented  to  the  condition.  Jackson,  in  a  message, 
December  26th,  informed  Congress  of  the  action 
of  Michigan.3  Michigan  was  admitted  January 
26,  1837.  She  offered  a  vote  in  the  presidential 
election.  In  announcing  the  vote,  the  vote  of 
Michigan  was  included  in  the  alternative  form. 

In  the  spring  of  1836,  Sherrod  Williams  inter- 
rogated the  candidates  for  President.  Harrison  4 
favored  distribution  of  the  surplus  revenue  and  of 
the  revenue  from  lands ;  opposed  internal  improve- 
ments, except  for  works  of  national  scope  and  im- 
portance; would  charter  a  bank,  but  with  great 

1  See  page  9. 

2  J.  Q.  Adams  was  greatly  incensed  at  the  wrong  to  Michi- 
gan.    9  Adams,  342.  8  51  Niles,  278.  *  51  Niles,  23. 


448  ANDREW   JACKSON 

reservations ;  thought  that  neither  House  of  Con- 
gress had  a  right  to  expunge  anything  from  its 
records.  Van  Buren  opposed  national  bank,  inter- 
nal improvements,  and  all  distribution.  The  equal 
rights  men  interrogated  the  candidates.  The  com- 
mittee reported  that  they  were  greatly  pleased  with 
Johnson's  replies,  but  that  Van  Buren's  were  un- 
satisfactory. Many  "  irreconcilable  "  equal  rights 
men  refused  to  vote  for  Van  Buren.  He  had  not 
yet  become  fully  identified  with  that  wing  of  the 
national  democratic  party  which  took  up  the  essen- 
tial features  of  the  loco-foco  doctrine. 

In  the  election  l  Van  Buren  received  170  votes, 
counting  3  of  Michigan ;  Harrison,  73  ;  White, 
26  (Georgia  and  Tennessee)  ;  Webster,  14  (Mas- 
sachusetts) ;  W.  P.  Mangum,  of  North  Carolina, 
11  (South  Carolina).  Van  Buren's  majority  over 
all  was  46.  Van  Buren's  and  Harrison's  votes 
were  well  distributed  geographically.  Van  Buren 
carried  Maine,  New  Hampshire,  Rhode  Island, 
Connecticut,  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  Virginia, 
North  Carolina,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  Louisiana, 
Illinois,  Missouri,  Arkansas,  Michigan.  Harrison 
carried  Vermont,  New  Jersey,  Delaware,  Mary- 
land, Kentucky,  Ohio,  and  Indiana.  The  popular 
vote  was :  for  Van  Buren,  761,549  ;  for  all  others, 
736,656;  Van  Buren's  majority,  24,893.2  For 
Vice-President,  R.  M.  Johnson  got  147  votes ; 

1  58  Niles,  392. 

8  American  Almanac  for  1880.  The  figures  in  Niles  are  full  of 
ebvious  errors. 


THE  BREAD  RIOTS  449 

Francis  Granger,  77;  John  Tyler,  47;  William 
Smith,  of  Alabama,  23  (Virginia).  As  no  one 
had  a  majority,  the  Senate  elected  Johnson.  In 
January,  1837,  Webster  wrote  to  Massachusetts1 
that  he  should  resign  his  seat.  He  intended  to 
retire  from  public  life,  at  least  temporarily. 

Van  Buren  was  now  at  the  height  of  his  am- 
bition ;  but  the  financial  and  commercial  storm 
which  had  been  gathering  for  two  or  three  years, 
the  accumulated  result  of  rash  ignorance  and  vio- 
lent self-will  acting  on  some  of  the  most  delicate 
social  interests,  was  just  ready  to  burst.  High 
prices  and  high  rents  had  already  before  the  elec- 
tion produced  strikes,  trades-union  conflicts,  and 
labor  riots,2  things  which  were  almost  unprece- 
dented in  the  United  States.  The  price  of  flour 
was  so  high  that  493,100  bushels  of  wheat  were 
imported  at  New  York  in  1836,  and  857,000  bushels 
before  April,  in  1837.3  Socialistic  notions  of 
course  found  root,  and  flourished  like  weeds  at 
such  a  time.  An  Englishwoman,  named  Fanny 
Wright,  became  notorious  for  public  teachings 
of  an  "  emancipated  "  type.  The  loco-focos  were 
charged  with  socialistic  notions,  not  without  justice. 
There  were  socialists  amongst  them.  The  meeting 
held  in  the  City  Hall  Park,  at  New  York,  February 
13,  1837,  out  of  which  the  "  bread  riots  "  sprang, 
was  said  to  have  been  called  by  them.  They  cer- 
tainly had  habituated  the  city  populace  to  public 

1  2  Webster's  Correspondence,  25  et  seq. 

2  48  Niles,  171 ;  50  Niles,  130.  8  52  NUes,  147. 


450  ANDREW  JACKSON 

meetings,  at  which  the  chance  crowd  of  idlers  was 
addressed  as  "  the  people,"  with  all  the  current 
catch-words  and  phrases,  and  at  which  blatant  ora- 
tors, eager  for  popularity  and  power,  harangued 
the  crowd  about  banks,  currency,  and  vested  rights. 
Of  course  in  these  harangues  violence  of  manner 
and  language  made  up  for  poverty  of  ideas,  and 
the  minds  of  the  hearers  were  inflamed  all  the 
more  because  they  could  understand  nothing  of 
what  the  orators  said,  except  that  those  addressed 
were  being  wronged  by  somebody.  On  that  day 
in  February  the  crowd  got  an  idea  which  it  under- 
stood.1 Some  one  said :  Let  us  go  to  Hart  [a  pro- 
vision merchant],  and  offer  him  eight  dollars  a 
barrel  for  his  flour.  If  he  will  not  take  it  —  !  In 
a  few  hours  the  mob  destroyed  five  hundred  barrels 
of  flour  and  one  thousand  bushels  of  wheat.  The 
militia  were  needed  to  restore  order.2  The  park 
meetings  were  continued. 

The  commercial  crisis  burst  on  the  country  just 
at  the  beginning  of  March,  when  Jackson's  term 
ended.  There  was  a  kind  of  poetic  justice  in  the 
fact  that  Van  Buren  had  to  bear  the  weight  of  all 
the  consequences  of  Jackson's  acts  which  Van 
Buren  had  allowed  to  be  committed,  because  he 
would  not  hazard  his  standing  in  Jackson's  favor 
by  resisting  them.  Van  Buren  disliked  the  reputa- 
tion of  a  wire-puller  and  intriguer,  but  he  had  well 

1  Byrdsall  (103)  says  that  the  riot  was  not  the  fault  of  the  loco- 
focos. 

2  61  Niles,  403. 


VAN  BUREN  451 

earned  his  title,  the  "  little  magician,"  by  the 
dexterity  with  which  he  had  manoeuvred  himself 
across  the  slippery  arena  of  Washington  politics 
and  up  to  the  first  place.  He  had  just  the  temper 
for  a  politician.  Nothing  ruffled  him.  He  Was 
thick-skinned,  elastic,  and  tough.  He  did  not  win 
confidence  from  anybody.  He  was,  however,  a 
man  of  more  than  average  ability,  and  he  appears 
to  have  been  conscious  of  lowering  himself  by  the 
political  manoeuvring  which  he  had  practised.  As 
President  he  showed  the  honorable  desire  to  have  a 
statesman-like  and  high-toned  administration,  and 
perhaps  to  prove  that  he  was  more  than  a  creature 
of  Jackson's  whim.  He  could  not  get  a  fair  chance. 
The  inheritances  of  party  virulence  and  distrust 
which  he  had  taken  over  from  Jackson  were  too 
heavy  a  weight.  He  lost  his  grip  on  the  machine 
without  winning  the  power  of  a  statesman.  He 
never  was  able  to  regain  control  in  the  party. 
American  public  life  is  constituted  out  of  great 
forces,  which  move  on  in  a  powerful  stream,  under 
constantly  changing  phases  and  combinations,  which 
it  is  hard  to  foresee.  Chance  plays  a  great  role. 
If  a  man,  by  a  chance  combination  of  circum- 
stances, finds  himself  in  one  of  the  greater  cur- 
rents of  the  stream,  he  may  be  carried  far  and 
high,  and  may  go  on  long ;  but  if  another  chance 
throws  him  out,  his  career  is,  almost  always,  ended 
forever.  The  course  of  our  political  history  is 
strewn  with  men  who  were  for  a  moment  carried 
high  enough  to  have  great  ambitions  and  hopes 


452  ANDREW  JACKSON 

excited,  but  who,  by  some  turn  in  the  tide,  were 
stranded,  and  left  to  a  forgotten  and  disappointed 
old  age.  Van  Buren  illustrated  these  cases. 

Parton  quotes  a  letter  of  Jackson  to  Trist,1  writ- 
ten March  2, 1837,  in  which  he  says  :  "  On  the  4th 
I  hope  to  be  able  to  go  to  the  Capitol  to  witness 
the  glorious  scene  of  Mr.  Van  Buren,  once  rejected 
by  the  Senate,  sworn  into  office  by  Chief  Justice 
Taney,  also  being  rejected  by  the  factious  Senate." 
The  election  of  Van  Buren  is  thus  presented  as 
another  personal  triumph  of  Jackson,  and  another 
illustration  of  his  remorseless  pursuit  of  success 
and  vengeance  in  a  line  in  which  any  one  had  dared 
to  cross  him.  This  exultation  was  the  temper  in 
which  he  left  office.  He  was  satisfied  and  trium- 
phant. Not  another  President  in  the  whole  list 
ever  went  out  of  office  in  a  satisfied  frame  of  mind, 
much  less  with  a  feeling  of  having  completed  a 
certain  career  in  triumph.2 

On  the  7th  of  March  Jackson  set  out  for  Ten- 
nessee. He  was  surrounded  to  the  last  with  affec- 
tion and  respect.  On  his  way  home  he  met  more 
than  the  old  marks  of  attention  and  popularity. 
He  was  welcomed  back  to  Nashville  as  he  had 
been  every  time  that  he  had  returned  for  twenty 
years  past.  These  facts  were  not  astonishing. 
He  retained  his  popularity.  Hence  he  was  still  a 

1  3  Parton,  624. 

2  When  Jackson  went  out  of  office  many  satirical  copper  coins, 
like  cents,  in   derision  of  his  sayings  and   doings,  were   issued. 
Amer.  Journ.  Numism.  Oct.  1869,  42. 


SWARTWOUT'S  CASE  453 

power.  It  was  still  worth  while  to  court  him  and 
to  get  his  name  in  favor  of  a  man  or  a  measure. 
Nevertheless,  it  does  not  appear  that  he  actually 
exerted  any  great  influence  at  Washington.  He 
could  not  get  an  appointment  for  his  nephew  as  a 
naval  cadet,  although  he  applied  for  it  frequently, 
—  at  least,  if  he  did  succeed,  the  evidence  of  it  is 
not  in  the  letters  before  us.  In  1842,  he,  like 
nearly  all  his  neighbors,  was  in  pecuniary  distress. 
Two  or  three  persons  came  forward  to  offer  loans 
to  him,  out  of  respect  and  affection,  but  the  ne- 
gotiations fell  through  for  reasons  which  are  not 
explained.  At  last  Lewis  obtained  a  loan  for  him 
from  Blair. 

Financial  revulsions  always  bring  to  light  many 
defalcations  and  embezzlements.  The  number  of 
these  revealed,  1837-42,  was  very  great,  including 
a  number  by  public  officers.  That  of  Swartwout 
furnished  a  striking  parallel  to  the  case  of  Wat- 
kins,  under  Adams,  which  Jackson  had  so  ruth- 
lessly exploited  against  his  predecessor.1  The 
Swartwout  oase  is  several  times  referred  to  in  the 
Ford  MSS.  in  letters  to  Lewis. 

"  I  shall  enquire  of  Mf  Love  Executioner  of  his  fa- 
thers estate,  to  be  informed  whether  any  of  ,Major  Lees 
manuscript  is  left  there.  I  hope  for  the  cause  you  have 
named,  Major  Lee  has  not  destroyed  the  manuscript  — 
you  know,  I  readily  would  have  renewed  his  nomination 
to  the  Senate,  had  I  at  any  time  been  informed  that  the 
Senate  would  have  confirmed  the  nomination  —  but  it 
1  See  page  189. 


454  ANDREW  JACKSON 

appears  to  me  that  those  I  have  had  the  greatest  confi* 
donee  in,  and  served  most,  have  acted  with  bad  faith,  — 
and  violated  that  confidence  reposed !  Is  it  true  that 
Mf  Samuel  Swartwant  is  really  a  defaulter  —  and  if  a 
defaulter,  to  what  amount,  please  to  give  me  the  time, 
&  the  amount.  ...  Is  it  known  when  he  commenced 
the  use  of  the  Public  funds  —  where  he  is,  &  if  expected 
back  to  america  — 

"  I  had  great  confidence  in  his  honesty,  honor  &  in- 
tegrity, and  appointed  him  to  the  office  on  the  sheer 
grounds  of  his  integrity  &  against  a  powerful  influence 
—  and  I  still  hope  he  will  relieve  me  from  the  slanders 
the  Whigg  papers  are  heaping  upon  me  that  *  I  knew 
of  his  using  the  public  money  in  speculation,  &  in  aid 
of  the  Texians '  —  a  greater  &  more  foul  slander  never 
was  uttered."  (Dec.  10,  1838.)  "  The  defalcation  of 
Swartwant  &  Price  has  given  great  pain  —  how  he  could 
so  far  depart  from  his  sacred  pledges  often  made  to  me 
that  he  would  touch  not,  handle  not  of  the  public  money 
for  any  thing  but  as  prescribed  by  law.  As  an  honora- 
ble man  he  ought  to  come  out  &  do  justice  to  the  ad- 
ministration &  unfold  to  the  public  how  the  money  has 
been  applyed  &  in  whose  hands  it  is  —  the  greatest  part 
must  be  in  the  hands  of  the  merchants  —  give  me  your 
views  on  this  subject."  (March  4,  1839.)  "  I  rejoice 
to  learn  that  Mf  Swartwant  is  likely  to  wipe  away  part 
of  the  indebtedness  &  to  close  his  indebtedness  with  the 
Government.  I  had  great  confidence  in  him,  and  that 
business  gave  me  more  pain  than  any,  &  all  others  dur- 
ing my  administration  — -  I  still  wish  him  well."  (May 
23,  1842.) 

Jackson  and  Lewis  nearly  came  to  a  quarrel  in 
1839.  Jackson  wanted  Lewis  to  resign  his  office, 


LEWIS  A  CIVIL  SERVICE  REFORMER     455 

but  Lewis  clung  to  it,  and  argued  like  a  good  civil 
service  reformer  against  his  own  removal.  He  was 
a  "conservative,"  and  differed  from  Van  Buren 
on  financial  measures. 

"  I  have  not  heard,"  wrote  Jackson,  "  one  cf  youi 
true  friends,  but  regretted  your  remaining  at  Washing- 
ton, and  you  must  well  conceive  that  your  remaining 
until  removed  would  be  truly  mortifying  to  me,  all 
things  considered  —  ...  You  must  well  recollect  how 
much  complaint  there  were  and  murmuring  by  your 
acquaintances  in  Nashvill  for  my  placing  you  in  office 
and  keeping  you  there  —  I  ballanced  not,  but  kept  you 
there  regardless  of  their  growls  to  the  end  of  my  term  at 
which  you  had  always  said  you  would  retire." 

One  cannot  avoid  a  recognition  of  retributive 
justice  to  find  Lewis  writing :  — 

"  I  have  been  here  too  long  and  am  too  well  acquainted 
with  the  manner  in  which  public  sentiment,  so  called, 
is  manifactured  in  this  city,  to  place  the  least  confidence 
in  news  paper  articles  upon  such  subjects.  The  most 
of  them  I  know  are,  and  have  been  heretofore,  written 
in  the  Departments  here,  (the  Treasury  and  Post  Office 
Depts  are  filled  with  newspaper  editors)  and  sent  to 
Penna  Ohio,  and  other  states  for  publication,  which  are 
then  carefully  collected  and  republished  in  a  little  dirty 
paper  in  this  city  (which  is  no  doubt  sent  to  you)  as 
evidence  of  public  sentiment !  These  things  may  im- 
pose upon  the  ignorant,  or  unsuspecting,  but  they  can- 
not decieve  me  —  nor  do  they  decieve  any  other  person 
here  who  is  acquainted  with  the  unprincipled  and  reck- 
less course  of  those  whose  business  it  is  to  blacken  the 


456  ANDREW  JACKSON 

character  of   every  body  whose    office  they  desire   for 
themselves,  or  their  particular  friends." 

Lewis  was  removed  by  Polk,  in  1845.  He  did 
not  like  it,  and  he  took  to  writing  complaints  and 
protests  in  the  newspapers,  just  like  an  ordinary 
mortal. 

A  large  part  of  the  letters  in  the  Ford  collection 
belong  to  the  period  after  Jackson's  retirement. 
They  do  not  show  Jackson  beset  by  visitors  anxious 
to  get  the  benefit  of  his  influence,  although  he  is 
shown  as  greatly  interested  in  public  affairs.  He 
rejoiced  greatly  when  Tyler  quarrelled  with  the 
whigs. 

"The  Presidents  message,  [of  1841],  for  the  most 
part  is  good  &  well  said.  That  part  of  it  which  relates 
to  a  fiscal  agent,  the  moment  I  read  it,  I  regretted  to 
see  it  introduced,  —  the  paper  money  system  —  treasury 
notes  to  be  issued  as  a  circulating  paper  currency.  .  .  . 
When  the  system  was  adopted  by  congress,  to  substitute 
treasury  notes,  instead  of  borrowing,  I  was  opposed  to 
the  plan  upon  constitutional  grounds  and  so  wrote  my 
friends  in  congress,  both  as  to  its  unconstitutionality 
and  to  its  expediency.  Congress  has  the  express  power 
to  borrow,  but  not  to  issue  bills  of  credit,  or  make  a 
paper  currency  —  The  government  cannot  pay  a  debt 
legally,  but  in  gold  &  silver  coin,  how  absurd  then  to 
collect  the  revenue  in  paper  in  which  it  cannot  comply 
with  the  powers  with  which  it  is  invested.  .  .  .  Ours 
was  intended  to  be  a  hard  money  government.  .  .  . 
The  duty  of  the  government  is  to  leave  commerce  to  its 
own  capital  &  credit  as  well  as  all  other  branches  of 
business  —  protecting  all  in  their  legal  pursuits,  granting 


JACKSON   AND   TEXAS  457 

exclusive  privileges  to  none —  Foster  the  labour  of 
our  country  by  an  undeviating  metalic  currency  for  its 
surplus,  allway  recollecting  that  if  labour  is  depressed 
neither  commerce,  or  manufactories,  can  flourish,  as 
they  are  both  based  upon  the  production  of  labour,  pro- 
duced from  the  earth,  or  the  mineral  world.  It  is 
unjust  to  them  by  legislation  to  depress  labour  by  a 
depreciated  currency  with  the  idea  of  prospering  com- 
merce &c  which  is  in  reallity  injured  by  it  —  " 

The  subject  which  interested  him  most  of  all, 
however,  was  the  annexation  of  Texas.  He  was 
very  ill  and  infirm,  and  every  letter  contains  its 
paragraph  of  description  of  his  ailments  and  dis- 
tress, yet  he  writes  letter  after  letter  to  Lewis,  re- 
iterating the  same  ideas  in  almost  the  same  words. 
This  interest  was  so  obvious,  and  so  consistent 
with  his  favorite  life-long  ideas,  that  we  wonder 
why,  when  he  was  President,  the  acquisition  of 
Texas  was  not  the  chief  object  of  his  policy. 

"How  degrading,"  he  writes,  in  1842,  "the  scenes 
in  the  House  of  Representatives  —  it  is  painful  that 
old  man  [J.  Q.  Adams]  who  must  be  deranged  or 
superlatively  wicked,  should  be  permitted  to  disgrace  our 
country  by  such  behaviour  —  his  constituents  ought  to 
call  him  home  — and  the  House  at  once  should  censure 
him  and  proceed  with  business ;  and  if  he  again  mis- 
behaves expell  him." 

"I  would  regret  much  that  President  Tyler  should 
go  against  the  annexation  of  Texas,  and  leave  it  under 
the  influence  of  great  Britain,  which  may  be  converted 


458  ANDREW  JACKSON 

to  our  great  injury  &  jeopardize  the  safety  of  Neworleans 
&  our  slaves  —  should  he  do  this  act  of  folly,  his  political 
star  sets  forever."  (Oct.,  1843.) 

These  are  the  ideas  of  constant  repetition,  the 
slave  consideration  being  foremost  in  importance.1 

"  If  possible  this  treaty  [of  March,  1844]  ought  not 
be  known  of  until  it  is  sent  to  the  senate  —  If  it  is, 
that  wicked  &  reckless  old  man  John  Q.  Adams,  will 
write  hundreds  of  memorials  &  send  them  over  the 
whole  country  to  get  signers  —  and  all  the  abolitionists 
&  many  more  will  sign  them  —  I  hope  the  senate  will 
act  so  promptly,  that  before  he  can  get  his  memorials  & 
petitions  distributed  &  signed  &  returned  to  congress 
the  treaty  will  be  ratified." 

In  1843  a  public  letter  was  obtained  from  him 
favoring  the  annexation  of  Texas.  This  letter  was 
evidently  prepared  for  him  after  the  fashion  of 
Lewis.  It  was  held  back  for  a  year,  and  then 
published  with  a  false  date.  So  Jackson  was  used 
by  the  annexation  clique  to  ruin  his  friend  Van 
Buren.  The  party,  which  he  and  Van  Buren  had 
consolidated,  passed,  by  the  Texas  intrigue,  away 
from  Van  Buren  and  under  the  control  of  the 
slavery  wing  of  it.  The  last-mentioned  letter  of 
Jackson  brought  him  again  into  collision  with 
Adams,  for  in  it  Jackson  repeated  his  former  as- 
sertions that  he  had  always  disapproved  of  the 
treaty  of  1819,  and  of  the  boundary  of  the  Sabine. 
Adams  produced  the  entries  in  his  "Diary"  as 

1  See  a  letter  from  Jackson,  reiterating  the  same  ideas,  pub 
Ushed  in  the  N.  Y.  Times,  June  16,  1897. 


ELECTION  OF  1844  459 

proof  to  the  contrary.  The  passage  from  the 
Diary l  shows  that  Jackson  thought  that  the  bound- 
ary ought  to  be  the  Rio  Grande,  but  that  he  con- 
sented to  the  Sabine  as  the  best  which  could  be 
got.  He  remembered  the  former  position ;  Adams 
insisted  on  the  second.  Jackson  also  made  use  of 
Erving's  statements  to  him,  in  1829,2  as  foundation 
for  a  charge  which  his  agents  pushed  with  great 
energy,  in  1844,  that  Adams  had  given  away  his 
country's  interests  in  1819.3  Adams  was  able  to 
show  that  Erving's  statements  had  been  misunder- 
stood or  were  incorrect. 

As  the  election  of  1844  approached,  Jackson 
became  more  and  more  interested  in  it.  He  wrote 
to  Lewis,  September  12,  1843 :  — 

"  If  the  Madisonian  had  left  Mr.  Tyler  to  be  judged 
of  by  his  acts,  he  would  have  met  with  a  much  better  sup- 
port from  the  Democracy  —  but  the  people  believe,  that 
these  papers  are  trying  to  raise  a  third  party  under  the 
name  of  Tyler,  not  for  his  benefit,  but  for  Mr  Calhouns, 
and  you  now  see  the  meetings  begin  to  shew  their  choice 
to  be  Van  Buren,  and  this  will  increase  until  the  Balti- 
more convention  settle  the  question,  and  that  will  be  on 
Van  Buren  —  mark  this  prophesy  —  This  diffidence 
of  our  friend  Cass,  was  ill  timed,  &  very  injudicious,  and 
for  the  present,  has  done  him,  in  Ohio,  a  great  political 
injury  —  and  the  attack  of  the  Calhoun  papers  on  V.  B. 
has  done  Calhoun  a  greater  injury  and  united  the  De- 
mocracy upon  V.  B.  —  " 

1  Cited  above,  page  84.  2  See  page  415. 

8  12  Adams,  93,  101,  123. 


460  ANDREW  JACKSON 

When,  however,  Van  Buren  flinched  on  annex- 
ation, Jackson  abandoned  him.  Letters  signed  by 
him,  favoring  Polk,  were  constantly  circulated 
through  the  newspapers.  Probably  he  was  mor- 
tified that  Clay  carried  Tennessee,  although  by 
only  113  majority  in  a  vote  of  120,000.  His 
share  in  this  campaign  was  his  last  public  activity. 
He  died  June  8,  1845.  He  had  had  honors  be- 
yond anything  which  his  own  heart  had  ever  cov- 
eted. His  successes  had  outrun  his  ambition. 
He  had  held  more  power  than  any  other  Amer- 
ican had  ever  possessed.  He  had  named  his  succes- 
sor. He  had  been  idolized  by  the  great  majority 
of  his  countrymen,  and  had  been  surfeited  with 
adulation.  He  had  been  thwarted  in  hardly  any- 
thing on  which  he  had  set  his  heart.  He  had 
had  his  desire  upon  all  his  enemies.  He  lived  to 
see  Clay  defeated  again,  and  to  help  to  bring  it 
about.  He  saw  Calhoun  retire  in  despair  and  dis- 
gust. He  saw  the  Bank  in  ruins  ;  Biddle  arraigned 
on  a  criminal  charge,  and  then  dead  broken- 
hearted. In  his  last  years  he  joined  the  church, 
and,  on  that  occasion,  under  the  exhortations  of 
his  spiritual  adviser,  he  professed  to  forgive  all  his 
enemies  in  a  body,  although  it  is  otherwise  asserted 
that  he  excepted  those  who  had  slandered  his  wife. 
It  does  not  appear  that  he  ever  repented  of  any- 
thing, ever  thought  that  he  had  been  in  the  wrong 
in  anything,  or  ever  forgave  an  enemy  as  a  specific 
individual. 


FULL  TITLES  OF  BOOKS  REFERRED  TO  IN  THIS 
VOLUME,  IN  THE  ALPHABETICAL  ORDER  OF 
THE  SHORTER  DESIGNATIONS  BY  WHICH  THEY 
HAVE  BEEN  CITED. 

Adams:  Memoirs  of  John  Quincy  Adams,  Comprising  Portions 
of  his  Diary  from  1795  to  1848;  edited  by  Charles  Francis 
Adams.  12  vols.  Lippincott :  Philadelphia,  1876. 

Adams's  Life  and  Works :  Works  of  John  Adams,  with  a  Life 
and  Notes  by  Charles  Francis  Adams.  Boston,  1856. 

Alison :  Dropped  Stitches  in  Tennessee  History. 

American  Annual  Register  for  1796.     Philadelphia. 

American  Register.     7  vols.     1806-1810.     Conrad :  Philadelphia. 

American  Whig  Review. 

Annual  Register:  The  American  Annual  Register.  8  vols. 
[numbered  for  the  purposes  of  the  present  work  as  follows]  : 
I.  1825-6 ;  II.  1826-7 ;  III.  1827-8-9,  Part  I. ;  IV.  1827-8-9, 
Part  H.;  V.  1829-30;  VI.  1830-1;  VII.  1831-2;  VIII. 
1832-3. 

Aristokratie  in  America,  aus  dem  Tagebuch  eines  deutschen 
Edelmanns,  herausgegeben  von  F.  T.  Grund.  2  vols.  Stutt- 
gart, 1839. 

Benton :  Thirty  Years'  View ;  or,  A  History  of  the  Working  of 
the  American  Government  for  Thirty  Years,  from  1820  to 
1850;  by  a  Senator  of  Thirty  Years  [Thomas  H.  Benton]. 
2  vols.  Appleton :  New  York,  1854. 

Binns :  Recollections  of  the  Life  of  John  Binns ;  written  by  him- 
self. Philadelphia,  1854. 

Bourne  :  The  History  of  the  Surplus  Revenue  of  1837 ;  by  E.  G. 
Bourne.  New  York,  1885. 

Bradley :  Biography  of  Isaac  Hill  [C.  P.  Bradley].  Concord, 
1835. 

ISutler :  A  History  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky ;  by  Mann 
Butler.  Louisville,  1834. 


462    FULL  TITLES  OF  BOOKS  REFERRED  TO 

Brothers :  The  United  States  of  North  America  as  They  Are, 
Not  as  they  are  Generally  Described  :  Being  a  Cure  for  Radi- 
calism ;  by  Thomas  Brothers.  Longman  &  Co. :  London, 
1840. 

Byrdsall :  The  History  of  the  Loco-Foco  or  Equal  Rights  Party ; 
by  F.  Byrdsall.  Clement  &  Packard  :  New  York,  1842. 

Cable :  A  History  of  New  Orleans  in  10th  Census,  Social  Statis- 
tics II. 

Carey's  Letters:  Nine  Letters  to  Dr.  Adam  Seybert;  by  Mat- 
thew Carey.  Author  :  Philadelphia,  1810. 

Carey's  Olive  Branch :  The  Olive  Branch ;  or,  Faults  on  Both 
Sides,  Federal  and  Democratic;  by  Matthew  Carey.  Author: 
Philadelphia,  1818.  (10th  Edition.) 

Chevalier :  Society,  Manners,  and  Politics  in  the  United  States : 
Being  a  Series  of  Letters  on  North  America ;  by  Michael  Cheva- 
lier (translated).  Weeks,  Jordan  &  Co  :  Boston,  1839. 

Cobb  :  Leisure  Labors  ;  or,  Miscellanies,  Historical,  Literary,  and 
Political ;  by  Joseph  B.  Cobb.  Appleton  :  New  York,  1858. 

Cobbett's  Jackson :  Life  of  Andrew  Jackson ;  by  William  Cob- 
bett.  Harpers :  New  York,  1834. 

Collins :  Historical  Sketches  of  Kentucky ;  by  Lewis  Collins. 
Cincinnati,  1847. 

Colton's  Clay :  The  Life  and  Times  of  Henry  Clay ;  by  C.  Col- 
ton.  2  vols.  Barnes :  New  York,  1846. 

Curtis's  Webster  :  Life  of  Daniel  Webster ;  by  George  Ticknor 
Curtis.  2  vols.  Appleton  :  New  York,  1870. 

Curtis's  Buchanan :  Life  of  James  Buchanan ;  by  G.  T.  Curtis. 
2  vols.  New  York,  1883. 

Documents  Relating  to  New  England  Federalism,  1800  to  1815 ; 
edited  by  Henry  Adams.  Little,  Brown  &  Co. :  Boston,  1877. 

Document  A.  15th  Congress,  2d  Session,  Reports,  No.  100. 

Document  B.  22d  Congress,  1st  Session,  4  Reports,  No.  460. 

Document  C.  22d  Congress,  1st  Session,  2  Reports,  No.  283. 

Document  D.  22d  Congress,  2d  Session,  1  Exec.  Docs.  No.  9. 

Document  E.  22d  Congress,  2d  Session,  Reports,  No.  121. 

Document  F.  23d  Congress,  1st  Session,  1  Senate  Docs.  No.  17. 

Document  G.  23d  Congress,  1st  Session,  1  Senate  Docs.  No.  2. 

Document  H.  23d  Congress,  1st  Session,  1  Senate  Docs.  No.  16. 

Document  I.  23d  Congress,  2d  Session,  1  Senate  Docs.  No.  17. 

Document  J.  23d  Congress,  2d  Session,  1  Exec.  Docs.  No.  9. 


FULL  TITLES  OF  BOOKS  REFERRED  TO    463 

Document  K  23d  Congress,  2d  Session,  2  Senate  Docs.  No.  13. 

Document  L.  24th  Congress,  2d  Session,  2  Exec.  Docs. 

Document  M.  23d  Congress,  1st  Session,  Senate  Docs.  No.  238. 

Drake's  Tecumseh :  Life  of  Tecumseh,  and  of  his  Brother,  the 
Prophet,  with  a  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Shawanoe  Indians ; 
by  Benjamin  Drake.  Morgan  :  Cincinnati,  1841. 

The  Duplicate  Letters,  the  Fisheries,  and  the  Mississippi ;  Docu- 
ments Relating  to  Transactions  at  the  Negotiation  of  Ghent ; 
Collected  and  Published  by  John  Quincy  Adams.  Davis  & 
Force  :  Washington,  1822. 

Duane :  Narrative  and  Correspondence  Concerning  the  Removal 
of  the  Deposits  and  Occurrences  Connected  Therewith.  [W.  J. 
Duane.]  Philadelphia,  1838. 

Duane 's  Pamphlets  :  Duane's  Collection  of  Select  Pamphlets. 
[W.  Duane.]  Philadelphia,  1814. 

Eaton's  Jackson  :  The  Life  of  Andrew  Jackson  ;  Commenced  by 
John  Reid,  Completed  by  John  H.  Eaton.  Carey:  Philadel- 
phia, 1817. 

Edwards :  History  of  Illinois,  from  1778  to  1833 ;  and  Life  and 
Times  of  Ninian  Edwards  ;  by  his  Son,  Ninian  W.  Edwards. 
Illinois  State  Journal  Co.  :  Springfield,  Illinois,  1870. 

Elliott :  The  Debates  in  the  Several  State  Conventions  on  the 
Adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitution.  4  vols.  Edited  by 
Jonathan  Elliott :  Washington,  1836. 

Felt :  An  Historical  Account  of  Massachusetts  Currency  ;  by  J.  B. 
Felt,  Boston,  1839. 

Folio  State  Papers :  American  State  Papers  ;  Documents  Legisla- 
tive and  Executive  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  from 
the  1st  Session  of  the  18th  Congress  to  the  1st  Session  of  the 
20th  Congress.  Gales  &  Seaton  :  Washington,  1859.  Subdi- 
visions :  Finance,  Indian  Affairs,  etc.,  etc. 

Ford  :  A  History  of  Illinois  ;  by  T.  Ford,  Chicago,  1854. 

Gallatin  :  Considerations  on  the  Currency  and  Banking  System  of 
the  United  States  ;  by  Albert  Gallatin.  Carey  &  Lea :  Phila- 
delphia, 183L  Reprinted  from  the  American  Quarterly  Re- 
view for  December,  1830. 

Gallatin's  Writings  :  The  Writings  of  Albert  Gallatin  ;  edited  by 
Henry  Adams.  Lippincott :  Philadelphia,  1879. 

Garland's  Randolph :  The  Life  of  John  Randolph  of  Roanoke ; 
by  Hugh  A.  Garland.  2  vols.  Appleton  :  New  York,  1851. 


464    FULL  TITLES  OF  BOOKS  REFERRED  TO 

Gayarre"  :  Louisiana  under  American  Domination  ;  by  C.  Gayarre". 
New  York,  1866. 

Gibbs :  Memoirs  of  the  Administrations  of  Washington  and  John 
Adams ;  edited  from  the  Papers  of  Oliver  Wolcott,  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  ;  by  George  Gibbs.  2  vols.  New  York,  1846. 

Gilmore  :  The  Advance  Guard  of  Western  Civilization.  New 
York,  1888. 

Gleig  :  The  Campaigns  of  the  British  Army  at  Washington  and 
New  Orleans  [G.  R.  Gleig].  London,  1836. 

Goodrich :  Recollections  of  a  Life-Time ;  by  S.  G.  Goodrich. 
2  vols.  Miller :  New  York,  1851. 

Goodwin's  Jackson  :  Biography  of  Andrew  Jackson  ;  by  Philo  A. 
Goodwin.  Clapp  &  Benton  :  Hartford,  1832. 

Gouge :  A  Short  History  of  Paper  Money  and  Banking  in  the 
United  States ;  by  William  M.  Gouge.  Collins :  New  York, 
1835. 

Gouge's  Texas  :  The  Fiscal  History  of  Texas ;  by  William  Gouge. 
Lippincott:  Philadelphia,  1852. 

Greeley :  The  American  Conflict ;  by  Horace  Greeley.  Case  : 
Hartford,  1873. 

Hamilton's  Works :  The  Works  of  Alexander  Hamilton.  Fran- 
cis: New  York,  1851. 

Hammond  :  The  History  of  Political  Parties  in  the  State  of  New 
York,  from  the  Ratification  of  the  Federal  Constitution  to  De- 
cember, 1840.  2  vols.  By  Jabez  D.  Hammond  ;  fourth  Edi- 
tion, with  notes  by  General  Root.  Phinney :  Buffalo,  1850. 

Hammond's  Wright :  Life  and  Times  of  Silas  Wright ;  by  Jabez 
D.  Hammond.  Barnes  :  New  York,  1848. 

Hauger :  Life,  Adventures,  and  Opinions ;  by  George  Hanger 
[officer  with  Cornwallis].  London,  1801. 

Harper's  Calhoun  :  Life  of  John  C.  Calhoun.  (Anonymous 
Pamphlet.)  Harpers  :  New  York,  1843. 

Haywood :  The  Civil  and  Political  History  of  Tennessee  to  1796 
[written  1823].  NashviUe,  1891. 

Hewitt :  An  Historical  Account  of  the  Rise  and  Progress  of  the 
Colonies  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia.  2  vols.  Anonymous 
[Alexander  Hewitt].  Donaldson  :  London,  1779. 

Hodgson  :  The  Cradle  of  the  Confederacy,  or  the  Times  of  Troup, 
Quitman,  and  Yancey ;  by  Joseph  Hodgson,  of  Mobile.  Register 
Office :  Mobile,  1876. 


FULL  TITLES  OF  BOOKS  REFERRED  TO    465 

Howard  :  Reports  of  Cases  Argued  and  Adjudged  in  the  Supreme 

Court  of  the  United  States. 

Hudson  :  Journalism  in  the  United  States :  New  York,  1873. 
Hunt's    Livingston :    Life  of    Edward    Livingston ;    by  Charles 

Havens  Hunt.     Appleton  :  New  York,  1864. 
Ingei-soll :   Historical  Sketch  of   the  Second  War  between  the 

United  States  of  America  and  Great  Britain ;   by  Charles  J. 

Ingersoll.     Events  of  1814.     Lea  &  Blauchard :  Philadelphia, 

1849. 
Jay :  A  Review  of  the  Causes  and  Consequences  of  the  Mexican 

War ;  by  William  Jay.     Mussey  :  Boston,  1849. 
Kendall's  Autobiography  :    Autobiography   of   Amos   Kendall ; 

edited  by  his  Son-in-law,  William  Stickney.     Lee  &  Shepard : 

Boston,  1872. 
Kendall's  Jackson :  Life  of  Andrew  Jackson,  Private,  Military, 

and   Civil  ;    by  Amos   Kendall.     Harpers :    New  York,  1843. 

(Unfinished.) 
Kennedy's  Wirt :  Memoirs  of  the  Life  of  William  Wirt ;  by  John 

P.  Kennedy.     2  vols.     Lea  &  Blanchard  :  Philadelphia,  1849. 
Kirke  :   The  Rear  Guard  of  the  Revolution  ;  by  Edmund  Kirke. 

[J.  R.  Gilmore]  :  New  York,  1886. 
Lambert's  Travels :  [1806-8].     2  vols.     London,  1816. 
Latour:    Historical  Memoir  of   the  War  in  West  Florida  and 

Louisiana  in  1814-15  ;  by  Major  A.  L.  Latour.     Conrad  :  Phil- 
adelphia, 1816. 
Lodge's  Cabot :   Life  and  Letters  of  George  Cabot ;   by  Henry 

Cabot  Lodge.     Little,  Brown  &  Co. :  Boston,  1877. 
Macgregor :   The  Progress  of  America,  from  the  Discovery  by 

Columbus  to   the  Year  1846 ;   by  John  Macgregor.     2   vols. 

Whittaker  :  London,  1847. 
Mackeinzie  :  The  Lives  and  Opinions  of  Benjamin  F.  Butler  and 

Jesse  Hoyt ;  by  William  L.  Mackeinzie.    Cook  &  Co. :  Boston, 

1845. 
Martin :   History  of  Louisiana ;  by  F.  X.  Martin :   New  Orleans, 

1882. 
Martineau's  Society,  etc. :  Society  in  America ;  by  Harriet  Mar- 

tineau.     2  vols.     Saunders  &  Otley  :    New  York  and  London, 

1837. 
Martineau's  Western  Travel :  Retrospect  of  Western  Travel ;  by 

Harriet  Martineau.     2  vols.     Harpers :  New  York,  1838. 


466    FULL  TITLES  OF  BOOKS  REFERRED  TO 

Mayo:   Political  Sketches  of  Eight  Years  in  Washington;   by 

Robert  Mayo  :  Baltimore,  1839. 
Memoirs  of   Bennett :    Memoirs  of  James  Gordon  Bennett  and 

his  Times  ;  by  a  Journalist.    Stringer  &  Townsend  :  New  York, 

1855. 
Mills's  Letters ;   Selections  from  the  Letters  of  the  Hon.  E.  H. 

Mills,  reprinted  from  the  Transactions  of  the  Mass.  Hist.  Soc, 

Cambridge,  1881. 

Monette  :  History  of  the  Mississippi  Valley.     New  York,  1846. 
Morse's  Adams :   John  Quincy  Adams  ;    by  John  T.  Morse,  Jr. 

Houghton,  Mifflin  &  Co. :  Boston,  1882. 
Niles :  Niles's  Weekly  Register,  1811  to  1848. 
Opinions  of  the  Attorneys-General :  Official  Opinions  of  the  At- 
torneys-General of  the  United  States.     Washington,  1852. 
Overton's  Reports :  1  Tennessee  Reports.     [Nashville  ?],  1813. 
Parton :    Life  of  Andrew  Jackson ;    by  James  Parton.     3  vols. 

Mason  Brothers  :  New  York,  1861. 
Perkins  :  Historical    Sketches   of    the   United    States  from   the 

Peace  of  1815  to  1830 ;  by  Samuel  Perkins.     Converse  :  New 

York,  1830. 
Peters :  See  Howard. 
Pickett:    History  of  Alabama  and  Incidentally  of  Georgia  and 

Mississippi,  from  the  Earliest  Period ;    by  A.  J.   Pickett.     2 

vols.     Walker  &  James  :   Charleston,  1851. 
Pitkin :  A  Statistical  View  of  the  Commerce  of  the  United  States 

of  America ;  by  Timothy  Pitkin.    Durrie  &  Peck  :  New  Haven, 

1835. 
Plumer's  Plumer :  Life  of  William  Plumer ;  by  his  son,  William 

Plumer,  Jr.     Phillips,  Sampson  &  Co. :  Boston,  1856. 
Political  Register  :  Edited  by  Duff  Green.    2  vols.    Washington, 

1832-33. 
Putnam  :    History  of  Middle  Tennessee,  or  Life  and  Times  of 

General  James  Robertson  ;    by   A.  W.   Putnam.      Nashville, 

1859. 
Quincy :  Figures  of  the  Past  from  the  Leaves  of  Old  Journals ; 

by  Josiah  Quincy.     Boston,  1883. 
Quincy's  Adams :  Memoirs  of  the  Life  of  John  Quincy  Adams  ; 

by  Josiah  Quincy.     Phillips,  Sampson  &  Co. :  Boston,  1858. 
Eaguet :    A   Treatise   on   Currency  and    Banking ;    by   Condy 

Raguet.    Grigg  &  Elliott :  Philadelphia,  1839. 


FULL  TITLES  OF  BOOKS  REFERRED  TO    467 

Ramsey :  The  Annals  of  Tennessee  to  the  End  of  the  Eighteenth 
Century  ;  by  J.  G.  M.  Ramsey.  Russell :  Charleston,  1853. 

Randall's  Jefferson :  Life  of  Thomas  Jefferson;  by  H.  S.  Randall. 
New  York,  1858. 

Robertson :  Reports  of  the  Trial  of  Aaron  Burr  for  Treason.  2 
vols. ;  by  D.  Robertson.  Philadelphia,  1808. 

Rush :  Memoranda  of  a  Residence  at  the  Court  of  London ;  by 
Richard  Rush.  I.  Key  and  Biddle :  Philadelphia,  1833.  II. 
Lea  &  Blanchard :  Philadelphia,  1845. 

Saff ord :  Life  of  H.  Blennerhasset ;  by  W.  H.  Safford.  Cincin- 
nati, 1859. 

Sargent:  Public  Men  and  Events  from  the  Commencement  of 
Mr.  Monroe's  Administration  in  1817  to  the  Close  of  Mr.  Fill- 
more' s  Administration  in  1853  ;  by  Nathan  Sargent.  2  vols. 
Lippincott :  Philadelphia,  1875. 

Seybert:  Statistical  Annals  of  the  United  States  from  1789  to 
1818  ;  by  Adam  Seybert.  Dobson :  Philadelphia,  1818. 

Southern  Bivouac. 

Sparks's  Morris  :  Life  of  Gouverneur  Morris,  with  Selections  from 
his  Correspondence  and  Miscellaneous  Papers  ;  by  Jared  Sparks. 
3  vols.  Gray  &  Bowen  :  Boston,  1832. 

[The]  Statesman's  Manual.    3  vols.    Williams :  New  York,  1854. 

Stevens  :  A  History  of  Georgia  from  its  First  Discovery  by  Euro- 
peans to  1798;  by  William  Bacon  Stevens.  2  vols.  Butler: 
Philadelphia,  1859. 

Story's  Story :  Life  and  Letters  of  Joseph  Story ;  by  his  Son, 
W.  W.  Story.  Little,  Brown  &  Co.  :  Boston,  1851. 

Sumner :  A  History  of  Banking  in  the  United  States ;  by  W.  G. 
Sumner.  New  York,  1896. 

Telegraph,  Extra:  United  States  Telegraph,  Extra;  March  to 
November,  1828.  Weekly.  Green  &  Jarvis  :  Washington. 

Truth's  Advocate  and  Monthly  Anti-Jackson  Expositor.  Cincinnati, 
1828. 

Tyler's  Taney :  Memoirs  of  Roger  Brook  Taney  ;  by  Samuel 
Tyler.  Murphy :  Baltimore,  1872. 

Tyler's  Tylers :  The  Letters  and  Times  of  the  Tylers ;  by  L.  G. 
Tyler.  2  vols.  Richmond,  1884. 

Von  Hoist  :  The  Constitutional  and  Political  History  of  the 
United  States  ;  by  Dr.  H.  von  Hoist,  (translated).  3  vols. 
Callaghan :  Chicago,  1878-81. 


468    FULL  TITLES  OF  BOOKS  REFERRED  TO 

Walker :  Life  of  Andrew  Jackson ;  by  A.  Walker.    Philadelphia, 

1860. 
Webster's  Correspondence :  The  Private  Correspondence  of  Daniel 

Webster  ;  edited  by  Fletcher  Webster.     2  vols.     Little,  Brown 

&  Co. :  Boston,  1857. 

Webster's  Works :  The  Works  of  Daniel  Webster.     6  vols.    Lit- 
tle, Brown  &  Co. :  Boston,  1851. 
Wheaton :  See  Howard. 
Whig   Almanac  :    The   Whig   Almanac   (from   1838).     Horace 

Greeley :  New  York. 
Wilkinson :  Memoirs  of  my  Own  Times ;  by  James  Wilkinson. 

Philadelphia,  1816. 
Wilson's  Works :  The  Works  of  James  Wilson,  LL.  D.     3  vols. 

Philadelphia,  1804. 
Wise :  Seven  Decades  of  the  Union ;  by  Henry  A.  Wise.     Lip- 

pincott :  Philadelphia,  187& 


INDEX 


INDEX 


A.15HBDEEN,  LORD,  satisfied  with  Jack- 
son's offer  regarding  West  India 
trade,  215. 

Abolitionists,  their  origin  and  growth, 
410  ;  send  documents  to  the  South, 
411. 

Adair,  General  John,  remonstrates 
with  Jackson  for  accusing  Kentucky 
troops  of  cowardice,  46 ;  as  gover- 
nor of  Kentucky,  supports  "  relief  " 
acts,  163 ;  petitions  for  redress,  164. 

Adams,  John,  prevents  war  with 
France,  31  ;  unfairly  blamed  for 
alien  and  sedition  acts,  255 ;  on  re- 
sponsibility of  Treasury  Department 
to  House,  353. 

Adams,  John  Quincy,  on  motives  of 
Congress  in  refunding  Jackson's 
fine,  57 ;  defends  Jackson's  course 
in  Florida,  80;  vindicates  it  to 
Spain  and  England,  82  ;  friendly  re- 
lations with  Jackson,  82  ;  says  vice- 
presidency  would  be  a  good  retreat 
for  Jackson's  old  age,  82  ;  his  de- 
fence of  Jackson  plausible  but  un- 
sound, 83 ;  his  case  against  Arbuth- 
not,  83 ;  consults  Jackson  on  Texan 
boundary,  84;  reports  Jackson  as 
willing  to  abandon  Texan  claim, 
84,  85;  on  plan  to  nominate  Clay 
for  Vice-President  in  1820,  92  ;  re- 
ceives one  electoral  vote,  92 ;  recog- 
nizes strength  of  Jackson  as  candi- 
date, 99  ;  his  public  services,  party 
connections,  and  character  as  candi- 
date, 102-104 ;  his  estimate  of  Cal- 
houn,  104,  105 ;  friendly  with  Cal- 
houn,  105 ;  on  Crawford's  quarrels 
with  Monroe,  107 ;  on  Benton's 
motives  for  supporting  Jackson, 
114;  refuses  to  appoint  Benton  to 
office,  114;  electoral  and  popular 
vote  for,  115;  on  the  infatuation 


of  Pennsylvania  for  Jackson,  115 ; 
elected  President  by  House,  116; 
his  encounter  with  Jackson  after 
election,  117  ;  gives  Clay  State  De- 
partment, 118  ;  accused  by  Jackson 
of  a  corrupt  bargain,  119 ;  Clay's 
reasons  for  supporting,  120  ;  thought 
a  less  dangerous  rival  for  Clay  than 
Jackson,  120  ;  not  at  first  the  object 
of  Jackson's  resentment,  122  ;  de- 
nies the  bargain  story,  123 ;  his  re- 
lations with  Clay  unfriendly  before 
1824,  124 ;  approached  by  Letcher 
with  suggestion  to  appoint  Clay, 
124;  told  by  Clay  of  purpose  to 
vote  for  him,  124 ;  asked  by  Scott 
to  appoint  Clay,  refuses  to  promise, 
125  ;  urged  by  Webster  not  to  pro- 
scribe federalists,  125;  hated  by 
federalists,  125;  conscious  of  hia 
lack  of  support,  134 ;  rendered  un- 
popular by  bargain  cry,  136;  his 
theory  of  presidency,  138 ;  wishes 
to  guide  and  suggest  national  im- 
provements, 138,  139  ;  makes  no  at- 
tempt to  create  an  administration 
party,  141 ;  offers  Treasury  to  Craw- 
ford, 141  ;  appoints  Rush,  a  politi- 
cal opponent,  141  ;  refuses  to  aid 
election  of  Mason,  141 ;  refuses  to 
punish  officials  for  opposition,  142 ; 
refuses  to  appoint  friends  to  office, 
142 ;  refuses  to  bid  for  popularity 
with  Germans,  142 ;  refuses  to  dis- 
miss McLean,  142,  143 ;  refuses  to 
correct  a  slander,  143 ;  his  inter- 
view with  Binns,  143  ;  his  adminis- 
tration in  a  minority,  143,  144; 
slanders  against,  in  campaign  of 
1828,  145,  146 ;  still  refuses  to  dis- 
miss McLean,  146  ;  controversy  with 
Giles  and  with  New  England  feder- 
alists about  changing  party  in  1807, 


472 


INDEX 


147  ;  electoral  and  popular  vote  for, 
148,  149  ;  his  administration  too  un- 
worldly, 149 ;  compared  with  that 
of  his  father,  149  ;  refusal  of  Jack- 
son to  call  upon,  179 ;  hurt  at  the 
slight,  180 ;  failure  of  attempt  to 
reconcile  with  Jackson,  180;  his 
mortification  at  discovery  of  Wat- 
kins's  defalcation,  189  n. ;  on  reasons 
for  rejection  of  Hill's  nomination  by 
Senate,  191 ;  refuses  to  run  on  ticket 
with  Crawford,  198 ;  refers  to  quar- 
rel between  Calhoun  and  Jackson, 
209  ;  says  Jackson  offered  War  De- 
partment to  Drayton,  212  ;  on  Jack- 
son's attitude  in  Peck  impeachment 
case,  220;  as  President,  appoints 
agent  to  investigate  Creek  treaty, 
222  ;  orders  Gaines  to  prevent  tres- 
pass on  Creek  lands,  222  ;  defied  by 
Troup,  222 ;  unpopular  in  South- 
west for  protecting  Indians,  224; 
on  Stevenson's  election  as  Speaker, 
241;  his  attitude  toward  tariff  of 
1828,  251  n. ;  chairman  of  Commit- 
tee on  Manufactures,  262 ;  wishes 
to  pay  debt  and  then  lower  duties, 
263  ;  proposes  abolition  of  Phi  Beta 
Kappa,  294;  an  anti-mason,  295; 
his  report  on  the  Bank,  302;  on 
branch  drafts,  303 ;  on  Bank's  sales 
of  coin,  303 ;  on  Bank's  share  in 
internal  improvements,  304;  on 
charge  of  non-user  against  Bank, 
305 ;  on  charge  of  Bank's  subsidiz- 
ing press,  305  ;  objects  to  loans  by 
Bank  to  members  of  Congress,  310  ; 
disgusted  at  Harvard's  compliment 
to  Jackson,  350 ;  accuses  Jackson  of 
posing,  350 ;  his  report  on  currency, 
389;  sustains  Jackson's  attitude 
toward  France,  405 ;  negotiates  in 
1819  concerning  western  boundary 
of  Louisiana,  412;  as  President, 
orders  Poinsett  to  buy  Texas,  413 ; 
said  by  Jackson  to  have  prevented 
annexation  of  Texas  in  1836,  418 ; 
his  speech  against  war  for  Texas, 
420 ;  on  factiousness  of  politics, 
430  ;  denounced  by  Jackson  for  his 
opposition  to  Texas,  457,  458 ;  con- 
troversy with  Jackson  as  to  latter 's 
position  on  Texas  in  1819,  458,  459. 


Adams,  Mrs.  J.  Q.,  gives  a  ball  in 
honor  of  Jackson,  104. 

Alabama,  opposes  a  congressional 
caucus,  109  ;  resents  expulsion  oi 
intruders  from  Cherokee  territory, 
228  ;  denounces  tariff,  256,  257,  335 ; 
opposes  nullification,  335 ;  nomi- 
nates White  in  1836,  444. 

Albany  Regency,  controlled  by  Van 
Buren,  111  ;  tries  to  prevent  choice 
of  electors  in  New  York  by  people, 
111 ;  loses  control  of  Legislature  to 
"people's  party,"  111. 

Alien  and  sedition  laws,  less  tyran- 
nical than  embargo,  32. 

Ambrister,  Robert,  captured  by  Jack- 
son in  Florida,  74 ;  his  questiona- 
ble status,  74,  75  ;  condemned  to  be 
shot,  his  sentence  commuted,  75 ; 
ordered  by  Jackson  to  be  hanged, 
75. 

Anti-masons,  origin  of,  289-293  ;  dis- 
rupt old  political  parties,  292  ;  hold 
convention  at  Utica,  their  prin- 
ciples, 293  ;  spread  into  Pennsylva- 
nia and  New  England,  293;  hold 
national  conventions  and  nominate 
Wirt  for  President,  294,  295 ;  their 
relations  with  Clay,  295;  decline 
to  call  a  convention  in  1836,  443; 
nominate  Harrison  for  presidency, 
444. 

Arbuthnot,  Alexander,  seized  by  Jack- 
son in  Florida,  72;  his  relations 
with  Indians,  73 ;  tells  his  son  to 
remove  goods  from  Jackson's  ad- 
vance, 73;  considered  by  Jackson 
to  have  warned  Indians,  73 ;  tried 
and  condemned  on  charge  of  incit- 
ing Creeks  to  war,  74;  his  con- 
demnation .unwarranted,  74,  78 ; 
hanged  by  Jackson's  order,  75; 
Adams's  case  against,  plausible, 
but  unsound,  83. 

Arkansas,  admitted  as  a  State,  446, 
447. 

Armstrong,  John,  his  advice  to  Jack- 
son about  invading  Florida  in  1814, 
43. 

Aury,  Louis  de,  a  pirate  in  Florida, 
67. 

Avery,  Colonel  WaightstUl,  his  duel 
with  Jackson,  20. 


INDEX 


473 


BACHE,  ,  defaulting  postmaster, 

reluctantly  removed  by  McLean, 
146. 

Balch,  Alfred,  letU*  of  Crawford  to, 
on  Calhoun,  198. 

Baldwin,  Judge  Henry,  in  case  of 
Briscoe  vs.  Bank  of  Kentucky,  423. 

Bank  of  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky 
vs.  Wister,  174. 

Bank  of  the  United  States,  estab- 
lishes branches  in  Kentucky,  155; 
accused  by  Kentucky  banks  of 
causing  panic,  156,  160 ;  declared 
constitutional  by  Supreme  Court, 
160,  166;  opposition  to,  in  Ken- 
tucky, and  attempt  to  tax,  160,  166 ; 
denounced  by  Desha,  169,  170  ;  pop- 
ular fear  of,  as  "money  power," 
264,  265 ;  events  leading  to  rechar- 
ter  in  1816,  265,  266 ;  its  charter, 
267,  268  ;  its  bad  management  prior 
to  1819,  268,  269 ;  reorganized  by 
Cheves,  269  ;  its  status  under  Bid- 
die,  270 ;  invents  and  misuses  branch 
drafts,  270,  271 ;  attacked  by  Bar- 
bour,  271 ;  hated  by  Woodbury  and 
Hill  because  of  Portsmouth  branch 
affair,  271-278  ;  accused  by  Ingham 
of  using  influence  in  politics,  272, 
274  ;  defended  by  Biddle,  273-276  ; 
threatened  by  Ingham,  276,  277 ; 
attempt  of  Jackson's  followers  to 
use,  in  behalf  of  administration, 
277 ;  origin  of  anti-Bank  clique, 
277-279 ;  attack  upon,  predicted  by 
Kendall,  280  ;  attacked  by  Jackson 
in  message,  280,  281 ;  its  constitu- 
tionality unquestioned  in  1829,  283 ; 
defended  by  McDuffie  and  Smith, 
284;  again  attacked  by  Jackson, 
285  ;  connection  of  Tyler's  views 
on,  with  Jackson's,  286,  287 ;  sus- 
tained in  Congress,  28G,  287 ;  sup- 
ported by  McLane,  288 ;  diminu- 
tion of  Jackson's  hostility  to,  in 
1831,  288;  dragged  by  Clay  into 
campaign  of  1832,  297,  298  ;  peti- 
tions for  renewal  of  charter,  300; 
its  case  mismanaged  by  Dallas,  300  ; 
report  of  McDuffie  upon,  301  ;  in- 
vestigation of,  by  committee,  301, 
302 ;  reports  for  and  against,  302  ; 
charges  against,  302-310;  really 


questionable  only  in  matter  of 
branch  drafts,  311 ;  doubtfulness  of 
Biddle's  veracity,  311 ;  really  dam- 
aged by  Bank  drafts,  312 ;  false 
theory  of,  held  by  Biddle,  313-315  ; 
suffers  from  heavy  payments  on 
public  debt,  315 ;  refusal  of  Jack- 
son to  compromise  with,  318  ;  re- 
charter  passed,  319;  vetoed  by 
Jackson,  319,  320  ;  its  share  in  elec- 
tion of  1832,  320 ;  opposed  by  local 
banks,  320;  attempts  to  extend 
loans,  339,  340;  called  unsafe  by 
Jackson,  340 ;  reported  safe  by 
Verplanck,  341  ;  ceases  to  contract 
loans,  342  ;  critical  condition  of  its 
western  branches,  342, 343 ;  declared 
safe  by  House,  343 ;  loses  through 
failure  of  France  to  meet  draft  of 
United  States,  344,  345;  attempts 
to  retain  part  of  a  dividend,  345 ; 
lawsuits  against,  on  this  point,  345  ; 
proposal  to  remove  deposits  from, 
345-347 ;  animus  of  attack  upon, 
346,  349;  Jackson's  opinion  of, 
352;  curtails  debts,  353;  depos- 
its removed  from,  354,  356-359; 
replies  to  paper  read  to  cabinet, 
355 ;  insincere  defence  of,  356 ;  fail- 
ure of  bill  to  recharter,  357  ;  at- 
tempt of  Taney  to  protect  pet 
banks  from,  359  ;  accused  by  Jack- 
son of  political  action,  and  of  man- 
ufacturing a  panic,  360,  370,  371 ; 
Taney's  reasons  for  removal  of 
deposits  from,  361 ;  petitions  Con- 
gress against  removal  of  deposits, 
361 ;  further  complaints  of  Jack- 
son against,  363,  374,  375,  400  ;  in- 
vestigated by  Senate  and  House, 
368,  369;  disputes  with  Treasury 
over  branch  drafts,  374 ;  further 
dealings  with  Treasury,  375;  final 
words  of  Jackson  against,  375, 
37G ;  failure  to  investigate  transac- 
tions of  members  of  Congress  with, 
376;  loans  capital  and  sells  branches, 
395 ;  aids,  after  New  York  fire,  395  ; 
gets  a  charter  from  Pennsylvania, 
its  corrupt  character,  395,  396  ;  dis- 
cussion of  its  financial  honesty,  397 : 
its  career,  after  1836,  destroys  con- 
fidence, 397,  398;  career  continu* 


474 


INDEX 


oua,  398 ;  unsound  from  the  out- 
set, 399 ;  its  final  dealings  with  Uni- 
ted States,  399,  400 ;  its  failures  in 
1838-1841,  400 ;  called  an  obsolete 
idea,  even  by  whigs,  401. 

Bank  of  United  States  vs.  Halsted, 
166. 

Bank  of  United  States  vs.  Planters' 
Bank,  167. 

Barbour,  Philip  P.,  proposes  to  sell 
stock  held  by  United  States  in  Bank, 
271 ;  appointed  to  Supreme  Court, 
424. 

Barry,  William  T.,  chief  justice  of 
Kentucky  new  Court  of  Appeals, 
165 ;  defeated  for  Governor  of  Ken- 
tucky, 174 ;  Postmaster  -  General, 
182 ;  the  tool  of  the  kitchen  cabi- 
net, 187  ;  asked  to  retain  office  in 
1831,  209;  favors  removal  of  de- 
posits, 346;  his  inefficient  manage- 
ment of  post-office,  409 ;  refuses  to 
answer  questions  of  investigating 
committee,  409 ;  succeeded  by  Ken- 
dall, 409 ;  appointed  minister  to 
Spain,  410. 

Barton,  T.  P.,  charg6  d'affaires,  di- 
rected by  Jackson  to  inquire  pur- 
pose of  France  in  1835,  407;  re- 
called, 407. 

Bell,  John,  supports  White  against 
Van  Buren,  441 ;  denounced  by 
democrats,  441. 

Benton,  Jesse,  his  feud  with  Jackson, 
36. 

Benton,  Thomas  H.,  upholds  Wilkin- 
son against  Jackson,  35 ;  secures 
reimbursement  of  Jackson's  ex- 
penses in  1813,  36;  his  feud  and 
brawl  with  Jackson,  36 ;  reconciled 
with  Jackson,  114;  supports  first 
Clay,  then  Jackson,  114;  said  by 
Adams  to  have  been  bought  by 
offer  of  a  foreign  mission,  114 ;  dis- 
credits bargain  story  against  Clay, 
119  ;  calls  Adams's  election  a  viola- 
tion of  the  "will  of  the  people," 
125 ;  upholds  democracy  against  the 
Constitution,  125,  126;  falsity  of 
his  position,  127  ;  violates  constitu- 
tional liberty,  128  ;  becomes  one  of 
Jackson's  managers,  135 ;  misrepre- 
sents Panama  congress  struggle, 


137  ;  fixed  upon  by  kitchen  cabinet 
as  successor  to  Van  Buren,  200  n. ; 
on  method  of  securing  Creek  land 
treaty,  222;  opposes  Clay's  land 
policy,  232  ;  introduces  bill  to  sell 
public  lands  cheaply,  233 ;  offers 
resolution  against  recharter  of 
Bank,  287;  says  Bank  attacked 
Jackson,  297  ;  describes  programme 
of  opponents  of  Bank,  301 ;  furnishes 
Clayton  with  charges  against  Bank, 
301 ;  in  error  in  charging  Bank  with 
causing  financial  disturbances,  315, 
316 ;  says  Calhoun  was  afraid  of 
Jackson  in  1833,  338 ;  approves  of 
removal  of  deposits,  347 ;  intro- 
duces resolutions  to  summon  Biddle 
to  bar  of  Senate,  363 ;  gives  notice 
of  expunging  resolution,  366 ;  holds 
caucus  to  enforce  expunging,  367 ; 
calls  distress  fictitious,  370;  moves 
to  investigate  specie  transactions  of 
Bank,  374;  his  devotion  to  metallic 
currency,  388  ;  wishes  to  receive 
only  specie  for  public  lands,  392. 

Berrien,  John  M.,  Attorney-General, 
182 ;  represents  Calhoun's  followers, 
183;  denounced  by  Jackson,  209; 
reverses  Wirt's  opinion  against 
South  Carolina  seaman  acts,  219; 
protests  against  tariff,  deprecates 
disunion,  256. 

Beverly,  Carter,  spreads  report  of 
Jackson's  accusation  of  a  corrupt 
offer  on  Clay's  part,  122;  writes 
apologetic  letter  to  Clay,  123. 

Bibb,  George  M.,  proposes  reduction 
of  price  of  public  lands,  234;  op- 
poses Jackson  on  Bank  question, 
365. 

Biddle,  Nicholas,  elected  president  of 
Bank,  269 ;  represents  young  ele- 
ment, 269 ;  receives  complaint  of 
Woodbury  against  Mason,  272; 
writes  confident  letter  explaining 
causes  of  Mason's  appointment, 
272,  273;  stirs  animosity  of  Hill 
and  Woodbury,  272 ;  denies  that 
politics  influence  Bank,  274;  forces 
Eaton  to  revoke  order  removing 
pension  agency  from  Bank,  274 ; 
calls  assailants  of  Mason  a  limited 
clique,  275  ;  denies  responsibility  to 


INDEX 


475 


Secretary  of  Treasury,  275;  reaf- 
firms non-partisanship,  276,  277  ;  re- 
monstrates against  removal  of  pen- 
sion funds  from  New  York  branch 
bank,  288;  reluctant  to  allow  re- 
charter  question  to  enter  into  cam- 
paign of  1832,  298  ;  wishes  Webster 
to  introduce  memorial  for  recharter, 
300;  defends  branch  drafts  against 
Cambreleng,  303 ;  on  charge  of  non- 
user,  304;  admits  favors  of  Bank  to 
T.  Biddle,  306;  secures  postpone- 
ment of  payment  of  three  per  cent, 
stock,  309 ;  combines  two  offices, 
310 ;  his  policy  to  escape  difficulties 
caused  by  branch  drafts,  312,  313  ; 
his  arguments  too  plausible,  312, 
313;  his  theory  of  bank  notes 
vicious,  313,  314;  asserts  too  much, 
314 ;  poses  as  protector  of  public, 
314,  315;  at  Washington  directs 
congressional  campaign,  318  ;  offers 
to  compromise  with  Jackson,  318  ; 
accused  of  corrupting  Congress, 
319  ;  repudiates  Cadwallader's  con- 
tract with  Barings,  340 ;  thinks 
Bank  strong  enough  not  to  contract 
loans,  342 ;  knows  of  re-drawing  be- 
tween branches,  342;  his  attempts 
to  retain  a  sum  as  compensation  for 
losses  incurred  by  refusal  of  France 
to  pay  indemnity,  345 ;  his  conduct 
held  by  Jackson  to  prove  unsound- 
ness  of  Bank,  352  ;  writes  answer  to 
Jackson's  paper  read  to  cabinet, 
355;  his  defence,  356;  motion  of 
Benton  to  summon  before  Senate, 
363;  charged  with  creating  distress, 
370,  371 ;  defends  branch  drafts, 
374 ;  on  method  of  securing  Penn- 
sylvania charter,  396  ;  doubts  as  to 
his  sincerity,  397  ;  his  foolish  course 
after  1836,  399 ;  arraigned  for  con- 
spiracy but  escapes,  400;  resigns 
presidency  of  Bank,  400 ;  his  last 
days  and  death,  400,  401. 

Biddle,  Thomas,  favors  shown  him  by 
Bank,  305,  306. 

Binney,  Horace,  holds  branch  drafts 
legal,  270. 

Binns,  John,  refusal  of  Adams  to 
help,  142,  143;  describes  interview 
with  Adams,  143 ;  effort  of  Eaton 


to  bribe,  191;  claims  to  have  in- 
vented political  conventions,  294  n. 

Blair,  F.  P.,  supports  Clay,  then 
Adams,  in  1824,  120  n. ;  brought  by 
Kendall  to  edit  a  Jackson  organ  at 
Washington,  206;  his  political  views, 
207 ;  his  ability  as  a  partisan  editor, 
207;  his  sympathy  with  Jackson, 
207;  supported  by  official  patron- 
age,  207,  208 ;  his  unprincipled 
guidance  of  Jackson,  323 ;  makes 
the  "  Globe  "  the  controlling  power 
of  the  party,  325,  326;  acts  as  Jack- 
son's mouthpiece,  326;  urges  re- 
moval of  deposits,  his  motives,  347 ; 
tries  to  moderate  Jackson's  anger 
at  Biddle,  352 ;  tries  to  control  elec- 
tions, 440;  loans  Jackson  money, 
453. 

Blount,  Governor  William,  on  Jack- 
son's efficiency  as  District  Attorney, 
11 ;  as  senator,  expelled,  13,  14  ; 
letter  of  Jackson  to,  39  n. 

Bonaparte,  Napoleon,  his  career  af- 
fects imagination  of  Burr,  24 ;  ad- 
mired in  the  West,  30;  distorted 
view  current  as  to  his  policy,  30, 
31 ;  his  duplicity  condoned  by  demo- 
crats, 31;  dupes  United  States  into 
war  with  England,  35;  his  pro- 
clamations imitated  by  Jackson,  46  ; 
compared  with  Jackson,  323,  324, 
349,  362. 

Brackenridge,  Henry  M.,  on  Jackson's 
imprisonment  of  Callava,  87. 

Branch,  John,  Secretary  of  Navy,  182  ; 
one  of  Calhoun's  followers,  183. 

Briscoe  vs.  Bank  of  Kentucky,  422-424. 

British  West  Indies,  negotiations  as 
to  trade  with,  214-216 ;  abolition  of 
slavery  in,  410. 

Broglie,  Due  de,  on  evil  effect  of  Jack- 
son's message  on  French  compensa- 
tion, 403 ;  prepares  to  fulfil  spolia- 
tion claims,  405 ;  offers  to  pay  if 
United  States  will  apologize,  407. 

Brooke,  F.,  letter  of  Clay  to,  120. 

Brown,  Major-General  Jacob,  contro- 
versy of  Jackson  with,  85  ;  his  ca- 
reer in  war  of  1812,  85. 

Brown,  Rev.  Obadiah  B.,  his  corrupt 
mail  contracts,  409;  resigns,  with 
an  "  Appeal  to  the  American  Peo- 


476 


INDEX 


pie,"  409 ;  writes  for  Johnson  a  re- 
port on  running  mails  on  Sunday, 
443. 

Buchanan,  James,  named  by  Jackson 
as  authority  for  bargain  story,  123  ; 
exonerates  Clay,  123  ;  conducts  Peck 
impeachment  case,  220;  his  failure 
in  impeachment  desired  by  Jackson, 
220. 

Bucktails,  in  New  York,  disorganized 
by  anti-masonic  movement,  292. 

Burke,  Edmund,  his  remark  on  Chat- 
ham applicable  to  Adams,  149. 

Burr,  Aaron,  acquainted  with  Jack- 
son, 21 ;  contracts  with  Jackson  for 
boats  on  Mississippi,  22  ;  his  project 
ill-defined,  24,  25 ;  probably  intends 
merely  filibustering,  not  secession, 
25;  tries  to  use  Jackson,  25;  his 
conduct  arouses  Jackson's  suspi- 
cion, 25  ;  overcomes  Jackson's  scru- 
ples, 26;  later  upheld  by  Jackson, 
26;  suggests  Jackson  as  presiden- 
tial candidate,  99;  his  influence 
denied  by  Jackson,  99  ;  defeated  in 
1801  by  Jefferson  through  corrupt 
appointments,  134. 

Butler,  Benjamin  F.,  signs  petition 
for  a  branch  bank,  285 ;  advises 
Jackson  to  side  with  Michigan  in 
boundary  controversy,  446. 

Butler, ,  missionary,  condemned 

for  violating  Georgia  laws  concern- 
ing Cherokees,  226,  227. 

CABINET,  its  members  not  "  Constitu- 
tional advisers"  of  President,  181 ; 
Jackson's  theory  of,  353,  354,  362, 
363. 

Cadwallader,  General  T.,  sent  by 
Bank  to  Europe  to  negotiate  for  ex- 
tension of  a  loan,  339 ;  makes  an 
arrangement  with  the  Barings,  340. 

Calhoun,  John  C.,  appointed  Secre- 
tary of  War,  64 ;  yields  to  Jackson 
in  controversy  as  to  authority,  64  ; 
sends  orders  to  Jackson  in  Seminole 
affair,  70 ;  annoyed  at  his  insubor- 
dination, wishes  him  censured,  80 ; 
writes  to  Jackson  an  approving  let- 
ter, 80;  tries  to  prevent  House 
from  attacking  him,  82  ;  popular  in 
South,  the  "  young  men's  candi- 


date" in  1824,  104;  Adams's  esti- 
mate  of,  104,  105;  friendly  with 
Adams,  105;  his  services  in  War 
Department,  105  ;  rival  of  Crawford, 
105;  accused  in  Rip  Rap  contract 
case,  106 ;  his  popularity  in  Penn- 
sylvania yields  to  Jackson's,  112  ; 
his  followers  expected  by  Jackson 
to  join  in  a  coalition,  112  ;  said  by 
Niles  to  have  opposed  Jackson  as  a 
"Bank  candidate,"  114;  suggests 
a  newspaper  organ,  134;  favors 
broad  construction  of  federal  pow- 
ers, 139  ;  appoints  committees  hos- 
tile to  Adams  and  Clay,  140 ;  refuses 
to  interfere  to  preserve  order,  141 ; 
takes  part  in  newspaper  controversy, 
141 ;  reflected  Vice-President,  hopes 
to  succeed  Jackson  after  one  term, 
181 ;  confirms  nomination  of  Ken- 
dall by  casting  vote,  191 ;  struggles 
with  Van  Buren  for  patronage,  193  ; 
damaged  in  Jackson's  estimation  by 
his  wife's  refusal  to  recognize  Mrs. 
Eaton,  196;  his  loyalty  doubted  by 
Jackson,  196  ;  his  enemies  poison 
Jackson's  mind  against  him,  196 ; 
suspected  by  Lewis  of  having  op- 
posed Jackson  in  Seminole  affair, 
197 ;  efforts  of  Crawford  to  turn 
Jackson's  mind  against,  198;  said 
to  have  favored  Adams  at  first, 
198  ;  efforts  of  Crawford  to  prevent 
Georgia  election  from  supporting, 
198;  his  proposal  to  censure  Jack- 
son reported  by  Crawford  to  For- 
syth,  199 ;  refuses  to  be  drawn  out 
on  the  subject  by  Henry  Lee,  199 ; 
his  loyalty  thoroughly  doubted  by 
kitchen  cabinet,  200;  doubted  by 
Jackson  in  letter  to  Overton,  201 ; 
his  toast  at  nullification  banquet, 
203;  his  advocacy  of  nullification 
drives  Jackson  to  other  side,  203 ; 
directly  betrayed  by  Crawford,  204; 
asked  by  Jackson  for  explanation 
of  perfidy,  204,  205  ;  sees  himself 
ruined,  205  ;  his  reply  condemning 
Crawford,  205 ;  letter  of  Jackson  to, 
declaring  breach,  205 ;  publishes  a 
pamphlet  on  the  Seminole  affair, 
209 ;  his  friends  turned  out  of  cabi- 
net, 209 ;  rejects  Van  Bureu's  nomi- 


INDEX 


477 


nation  by  casting  vote,  210 ;  defeats 
woollen  tariff  by  casting  vote,  239  ; 
loses  support  in  Pennsylvania  and 
New  York,  239  ;  holds  Van  Buren 
responsible  for  tariff  of  1828,  251 ; 
his  political  error  in  opposing  tariff 
on  nullification  ground,  256,  257; 
Jackson's  opinion  of  his  course,  259  ; 
considered  as  possible  candidate  for 
President  by  anti-masons,  295 ;  re- 
signs vice-presidency  and  enters 
Senate,  331 ;  becomes  absorbed  in 
political  mysticism,  331 ;  his  intense 
earnestness,  331,  332 ;  denies  that 
South  Carolina  is  hostile  to  Union, 
332  ;  offers  resolutions  on  nature  of 
Constitution,  333,  334 ;  said  to  have 
been  driven  by  fear  of  Jackson  into 
an  agreement  with  Clay,  338 ;  later 
claims  to  have  won  victory  by  com- 
promise tariff,  339 ;  joins  whigs  in 
Bank  struggle,  365;  proposes  to 
amend  Constitution  so  as  to  allow 
distribution  of  surplus,  381,  386; 
suspected  by  Jackson  of  plan  to 
defeat  Van  Bureu's  nomination  in 
1844,  459. 

California,  the  real  object  of  Mexican 
war,  413,  420. 

Call,  General  Richard  K.,  censured  by 
Jackson  for  insulting  Mrs.  Eaton, 
195. 

Callava,  Spanish  ex-governor  of  Flo- 
rida, refuses  to  deliver  papers  to 
Jackson,  sent  to  calaboose,  87  ;  goes 
to  Washington  to  protest,  88. 

Cambreleng,  C.,  visits  Crawford,  198  ; 
criticises  branch  bank  drafts,  Bid- 
die's  ineffective  reply,  303. 

Campbell,  George  W.,  letters  of  Jack- 
son to,  26,  27. 

Campbell,  Rev.  J.  N.,  called  before 
cabinet  by  Jackson  for  defaming 
Mrs.  Eaton,  195;  challenged  by 
Eaton,  211. 

Canning,  George,  admits  that  Eng- 
land was  coerced  into  opening  West 
India  trade,  216. 

Bass,  Lewis,  Secretary  of  War,  212  ; 
revokes  order  transferring  pension 
funds  from  New  York  branch  bank, 
288 ;  opposes  removal  of  deposits, 


Catron,  John,  tells  Webster  of  desire 
in  West  to  free  Texas,  418. 

Cherokees,  land  bought  from,  by  Jack- 
son, 60;  their  land  claimed  by 
Georgia,  223 ;  their  number,  charac- 
ter, and  civilization,  223;  laws  of 
Georgia  claiming  jurisdiction  over, 
224-226 ;  their  removal  provided  for 
by  Congress,  225;  appeal  to  Su- 
preme Court,  225,  226;  abandoned 
by  Jackson,  226,  227 ;  finally  sell 
their  lands  and  remove  to  Indian 
Territory,  229. 

Chevalier,  Michael,  compares  debates 
of  1834  to  those  of  French  Revolu- 
tion, 364 ;  on  Jackson's  reasons  for 
defying  France,  404. 

Cheves,  Langdon,  favors  secession  in 
1831,  261;  his  successful  presi- 
dency of  Bank,  269 ;  thinks  many 
branches  disadvantageous,  307. 

Chickasaws,  their  situation  in  Missis- 
sippi, 223. 

Choctaws,  their  lands  in  Mississippi, 
223 ;  cede  their  lands  in  1830,  228  ; 
terms  of  their  removal  to  Indian 
Territory,  229. 

Civil  service,  appointments  to,  Jack- 
son's early  ideas  upon,  62,  63 ;  four- 
years'  term  introduced  by  Craw- 
ford, 107 ;  Adams's  administration 
of,  141-143,  146;  its  degradation 
under  Jackson,  187-192,  409,453, 
454. 

Claiborne,  General  W.  C.  C.,  serves 
in  Creek  war,  38 ;  wishes  martial 
law  abolished,  54 ;  describes  Amos 
Kendall,  185. 

Clark,  Judge,  declares  Kentucky  re- 
plevin law  unconstitutional,  162; 
attempt  made  to  remove  him,  163. 

Clay,  Henry,  leads  new  generation  of 
republicans,  34 ;  opposes  Monroe's 
administration  out  of  pique  at  fail- 
ure to  receive  State  Department,  81 ; 
attacks  Jackson's  Florida  career, 
81 ;  possibly  regards  Jackson  as  a 
presidential  rival,  82 ;  alleged  plan 
to  nominate  for  Vice-President  in 
1820,  92;  his  reputation  and  posi- 
tion as  presidential  candidate  in 
1824,  108 ;  his  political  principles, 
108 ;  his  gambling  habits,  108, 109; 


478 


INDEX 


reconciled  with  Jackson,  114 ;  elec- 
toral and  popular  vote  for,  115 ; 
his  influence  in  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, 115;  suspected  of  cor- 
rupt motives  for  supporting  Adams, 
117 ;  accepts  State  Department  in 
spite  of  charges,  117  ;  question  of 
propriety  of  his  conduct,  117,  118 ; 
Jackson's  rage  against,  119 ;  charge 
of  corruption  invalid,  119:  Clay's 
reasons  for  not  favoring  Jackson, 
120;  demands  an  investigation  of 
Kremer's  charges,  121 ;  bitterly  de- 
nounced by  Jackson,  121 ;  replies, 
121 ;  his  nomination  meets  oppo- 
sition in  Senate,  122;  calls  upon 
Jackson  for  proof  of  Carter  Bev- 
erly's story,  123  ;  exonerated  by 
Buchanan,  123 ;  calls  upon  Jackson 
to  retract,  123 ;  continues  to  be  ac- 
cused by  Jackson,  123;  later  re- 
grets having  accepted  office,  123; 
not  on  friendly  terms  with  Adams 
before  1824,  124 ;  his  friends  urge 
Adams  to  appoint  him  to  office,  124, 
125 ;  tells  Adams  of  intention  to 
support  him,  124 ;  abused  by  Ran- 
dolph, 131 ;  his  duel  with  Randolph, 
131 ;  his  championship  of  South 
American  republics,  135;  urges 
Adams  not  to  allow  officials  openly 
to  oppose  him,  141,  142 ;  wishes 
McLean  removed,  142  ;  wishes  Ad- 
ams to  refute  charges  of  defalca- 
tion, 143;  Kendall's  quarrel  with, 
183,  184;  suspected  by  Jackson  of 
instigating  attack  on  Mrs.  Eaton, 
196 ;  reconciled  with  Crawford,  198 ; 
rendered  unpopular  in  West  by  pub- 
lic land  policy,  232 ;  his  scheme  re- 
jected in  1832  by  Congress,  234; 
announces  views  on  tariff  in  1831, 
262;  wishes  to  stop  paying  debt, 
203 ;  defies  the  South,  263 ;  expected 
by  anti-masons  to  withdraw  in  favor 
of  Wirt,  295 ;  his  position  on  ma- 
sonry. 295 ;  uses  Bank  recharter  as 
issue  in  campaign  of  1832,  297  ;  his 
dictatorial  behavior,  298;  vote  for, 
in  1832,  320,  321 ;  introduces  com- 
promise tariff,  335  ;  forced  into 
untenable  position  by  protected 
manufacturers,  338;  agrees  with 


Calhoun  on  compromise,  338;  his 
later  controversy  with  Calhoun  as 
to  which  won,  339 ;  denounced  by 
protectionists  for  treachery,  339  ; 
moves  a  call  for  paper  read  to  cabi- 
net, 362;  introduces  resolutions  of 
censure  on  Taney  and  Jackson,  363 ; 
his  land  bill  vetoed  by  Jackson, 
380 ;  again  fails  to  pass  it,  381, 386 ; 
refuses  to  run  against  Van  Buren, 
439  ;  carries  Tennessee,  to  Jack- 
son's disgust,  460. 

Clayton,  John  M.,  offers  resolutions 
on  Constitution,  333.  . 

Clayton,  Judge,  announces  intention 
to  enforce  State  laws  against  Chero- 
kees,  225 ;  his  speech  in  sentencing 
two  missionaries,  227;  denounces 
tariff  but  opposes  disunion,  256; 
moves  for  an  investigation  of  Bank, 
301. 

Clinton,  De  Witt,  a  presidential  can- 
didate, 102 ;  supports  Jackson 
against  Crawford,  111 ;  removed 
from  office  by  Albany  Regency, 
111 ;  his  place  as  Jackson  leader  in 
New  York  taken  by  Van  Buren, 
130;  his  followers  urged  by  Lewis 
to  support  Jackson,  147  ;  nominated 
for  presidency  in  1812  by  a  conven- 
tion, 294. 

Cobb,  Thomas  W.,  denounces  tariff, 
but  disclaims  disunion  sentiment, 
256. 

Cobden,  Richard,  shocked  at  social 
condition  of  United  S'^ates,  430. 

Cochrane,  Admiral,  ordered  to  ravage 
United  States  coasts,  49. 

Cohens  vs.  Virginia,  169. 

Coinage,  regulation  of,  389-392. 

Coleman,  Dr.  L.  H.,  letter  of  Jack- 
son to,  on  tariff,  95. 

Connecticut,  anti-masonry  in,  293 ; 
opposes  nullification,  335. 

Constitution,  its  conflict  with  Ben- 
ton's  demos  krateo  theory,  125- 
128  ;  amendments  to,  proposed  by 
democrats,  137 ;  development  of,  by 
Supreme  Court,  under  Marshall,  166- 
171, 174,  175  ;  its  relation  to  inter- 
nal improvements,  235  ;  as  affected 
by  Jackson's  theory  of  presidency, 
324,  325 ;  its  relation  to  nullifies, 


INDEX 


479 


tion,  333,  334;  in  relation  to  Jack- 
son's theory  of  presidency,  349,  353, 
354,  363;  interpretation  of,  by  Su- 
preme Court  after  Marshall,  422- 
428. 

Cooke,  John,  major-general  of  Ten- 
nessee militia,  37 ;  quarrels  with 
Jackson,  38. 

Coppinger,  ,  papers  seized  from, 

by  Jackson's  orders,  89. 

Craig  vs.  Missouri,  175. 

Crawford,  W.  H.,  revises  Jackson's 
treaty  with  Creeks,  60 ;  disliked  by 
Jackson,  60;  transferred  to  Treasury 
Department,  64 ;  thought  by  Jack- 
son to  have  been  his  enemy  in  cabi- 
net, 81 ;  instigates  House  commit- 
tee to  act  against  Jackson,  82  ;  his 
friends  lead  in  attacking  Jackson, 
82  ;  his  enmity  to  Calhoun,  105 ; 
the  "  regular  "  candidate,  106 ;  his 
career  and  character,  106, 107  ;  his 
controversy  with  Edwards,  106;  in- 
troduces four-years'  term  act,  107  ; 
said  to  have  quarrelled  with  Mon- 
roe, 107  ;  his  friends  nominate  Van 
Buren  for  vice-presidency,  107;  phy- 
sically disabled  in  1824,  108;  dis- 
liked by  all  other  candidates,  108 ; 
nominated  by  a  caucus  of  his 
friends,  110  ;  his  candidacy  man- 
aged by  Van  Buren,  110,  111 ;  up- 
held by  "  regular  "  democratic 
convention  in  Pennsylvania,  113  ; 
electoral  and  popular  vote  for,  115 ; 
vote  of  House  for,  116  ;  Clay's 
reasons  for  not  supporting,  120 ; 
visits  Capitol  before  the  election, 
120  n. ;  his  political  career  ended, 
128;  recovers  health  and  becomes 
circuit  judge,  128  ;  his  candidacy 
ruined  by  ill-health,  130  ;  the  only 
States'-rights  candidate,  139  ;  re- 
fuses Adams's  offer  of  Treasury 
Department,  141  ;  his  hatred  of 
Calhoun,  197  ;  visited  by  Van 
Buren,  198;  writes  letter  accusing 
Calhoun  of  enmity  to  Jackson,  198  ; 
plan  to  nominate  for  vice-presi- 
dency, 198  ;  tries  to  persuade  Geor- 
gia electors  not  to  vote  for  Cal- 
houn, 198;  reconciled  with  Clay, 
198;  tells  Forsyth  that  Calhoun 


proposed  to  censure  Jackson  in 
1818,  199;  tells  Jackson  of  Cal- 
houn's  attitude,  204;  says  Jack- 
son's Rhea  letter  converted  him, 
204  ;  complained  of,  by  Calhoun, 
205;  opposes  nullification  and  se- 
cession, 256 ;  refers  to  Gallatin  as 
authority  for  power  to  transfer 
drafts  to  banks,  359. 

Creeks,  instigated  to  war  by  Tecum- 
seh,  37 ;  massacre  garrison  of  Fort 
Mims,  37 ;  character  of  war  with, 
38 ;  defeated  by  Jackson,  41  ;  sig- 
nificance of  war  with,  41,  42  ;  Jack- 
son's treaty  with,  modified  by  Craw- 
ford, 60 ;  refugees  from,  in  Flor- 
ida, 65;  attacked  at  Fowltown  by 
Gaines,  68,  69  ;  their  lands  in  Geor- 
gia, 221 ;  refuse  to  sell  land,  221 ; 
their  chiefs  sell  land  by  treaty 
of  Indian  Spring,  221 ;  repudiate 
treaty,  222  ;  protected  by  Adams, 
222 ;  make  a  new  treaty  ceding 
land,  222  ;  their  numbers  and  char- 
acter, 223,  224 ;  forced  to  move  west 
of  Mississippi,  2-29. 

Crittenden,  J.  J.,  on  Calhoun's  fears 
in  1833,  338. 

Curtis,  George  Ticknor,  on  Calhoun's 
fears  in  1833,  336. 

DALLAS,  A.  J.,  asks  Jackson  to  ex- 
plain his  difficulties  with  civil  au- 
thorities at  New  Orleans,  58. 

Dallas,  George  M.,  withdraws  Cal- 
houn's name  from  presidential  can- 
didacy in  Pennsylvania,  112 ;  pre- 
sents memorial  of  Bank  for  re- 
charter,  300. 

Dartmouth  College  vs.  Woodward, 
168. 

Davis,  Warren  R.,  his  funeral,  432. 

Dearborn,  H.  A.  8.,  on  effect  of  hemp 
duties  in  Boston,  263. 

Delaware,  votes  for  Adams  in  1828, 
148 ;  opposes  nullification,  335. 

Democratic  party,  begins  as  opposi- 
tion to  Adams,  its  elements,  130; 
its  leaders,  131 ;  organized  by  Van 
Buren,  131-133 ;  its  managers,  135 ; 
begins  opposition  in  1825,  136 ;  its 
factious  opposition  to  Panama  mis- 
sion, 137  ;  denounces  Monroe  doc- 


480 


INDEX 


trine,  137 ;  asserts  regard  for 
States'  rights,  139;  aided  by  Cal- 
houn,  140,  141 ;  members  of,  not 
turned  out  of  office  by  Adams,  142, 
143, 146  ;  attacks  administration  for 
extravagance,  144 ;  causes  for  its 
success  under  Jackson,  176-179 ; 
celebrates  his  inauguration,  179; 
split  in,  between  Calhoun  and  Jack- 
son, 201-206,  209 ;  incongruous  ele- 
ments of,  232 ;  torn  by  tariff  ques- 
tion, 250,  251 ;  obliged  by  Jackson 
to  oppose  Bank,  285  ;  its  organiza- 
tion and  principles  in  1832,  296,  299  ; 
its  national  convention  of  1832, 317 ; 
forced  by  Jackson  into  support  of 
Van  Buren,  318 ;  denounces  Senate, 
364 ;  influenced  by  loco-f oco^,  438 ; 
its  full  organization  in  1836,  439, 
440 ;  its  control  over  country,  440 ; 
holds  convention  in  1835,  440,  442  ; 
division  in,  between  followers  of 
White  and  Jackson,  441 ;  nominates 
Van  Buren,  442;  elects  its  candi- 
dates, 448,  449  ;  Van  Buren  loses 
control  of,  451,  458 ;  controlled  by 
South,  458. 

Deposits,  removal  of,  see  Bank  ; 
plan  debated  in  cabinet,  345-347  ; 
authors  of,  347,  349  ;  refusal  of 
Duane  to  carry  out,  350,  351,  353 ; 
preparation  for,  by  Kendall,  351, 
352 ;  carried  out  by  Taney,  354  ; 
discussion  of,  355 ;  Taney's  reasons, 
361. 

Desha,  Governor  Joseph,  denounces 
all  banks,  171 ;  defends  relief  sys- 
tem and  State  sovereignty,  172 ; 
vetoes  repeal  of  law  establishing 
the  new  Court  of  Appeals,  173. 

Dick,  John,  District  Attorney,  secures 
habeas  corpus  for  Hall  against  Jack- 
son, 56  ;  arrested  and  released,  56. 

Dickens,  Asbury,  on  Michigan  consti- 
tutional convention,  446. 

Dickinson,  Charles,  his  quarrel  and 
duel  with  Jackson,  21  ;  wounds 
Jackson  somewhat  seriously  and  is 
himself  killed,  21. 

Dinsmore,  Silas,  refuses  to  allow  pas- 
sage of  negroes  through  Indian 
country,  27 ;  his  removal  and  ruin 
caused  by  Jackson,  27  ;  attempts  in 


vain  a  reconciliation  with  Jackson, 
27. 

Diplomatic  history,  treaty  of  1795 
with  Spain,  22  ;  purchase  of  Louisi- 
ana, 23  ;  settlement  with  Spain  and 
England  after  Jackson's  invasion  of 
Florida,  78,  80;  Van  Buren's  in- 
structions  to  McLane  in  1829,  210 ; 
question  of  trade  with  British  West 
Indies,  214-216 ;  mission  of  McLane 
to  England,  215;  mission  of  Rives 
to  France,  217,  404  ;  question  of 
French  spoliation  claims,  217,  218, 
402-408 ;  Jackson's  belligerent  mes- 
sage, 403,  404  ;  refusal  of  France 
to  pay,  405 ;  Livingston's  return, 
406  ;  controversy  between  Jackson 
and  Broglie,  407 ;  diplomatic  rela- 
tions broken  off,  407 ;  deadlock 
broken  by  England's  mediation, 
408 ;  final  explanations,  408 ;  nego- 
tiations with  Mexico  concerning 
Texas,  415 ;  treaties  with  Mexico, 
416  ;  dispute  with  Mexico  over 
Gaines's  invasion,  419 ;  claims  made 
against  Mexico,  421 ;  settlement  by 
negotiation,  421. 

Donelson,  John,  early  settler  of  Ten- 
nessee, 11. 

Donelson,  Mrs.  John,  Jackson  boards 
with,  11. 

Donelson,  Rachel,  marries  Robards, 
11 ;  accused  by  him  of  adultery 
with  Jackson,  11,  12 ;  marries  Jack- 
son under  scandalous  circumstances, 
12 ;  Jackson's  subsequent  devotion 
to,  13  ;  slandered  by  Dijkinson,  21 ; 
slandered  during  campaign  of  1828, 
179 ;  her  death,  179. 

Donelson,  Mrs.,  wife  of  Jackson's 
nephew,  banished  from  White  House 
for  not  recognizing  Mrs.  Eaton,  194. 

Drayton,  William,  his  appointment 
urged  by  Jackson  upon  Monroe,  in 
letters  written  by  Lewis,  60,  61  ; 
not  acquainted  with  Jackson,  61 ;  a 
South  Carolina  federalist,  61 ;  leads 
Union  party,  212  ;  offered  War  De- 
partment by  Jackson,  212. 

Duane,  William  J.,  appointed  Secre- 
tary of  Treasury  by  Jackson,  345; 
his  character,  346  ;  objects  to  secret 
influence  of  kitchen  cabinet,  347. 


INDEX 


348 ;  describes  its  control  over  Jack- 
son, 348;  urged  by  Whitney  to  re- 
move deposits,  349  ;  refuses,  350  ; 
unmoved  by  Jackson's  arguments, 
350,  351 ;  refuses  to  yield  responsi- 
bility to  Jackson,  354 ;  refuses  to 
resign  and  is  dismissed,  354 ;  pub- 
lishes correspondence  and  attacks 
removal  policy,  354,  355 ;  abused  by 
party  press,  355. 

Duncan,  Joseph,  on  gold  and  silver 
ratio,  390. 

Duvall,  Gabriel,  resigns  from  Su- 
preme Court,  423. 

EATON,  JOHN  H.,  bis  share  in  start- 
ing corruption  story  in  1825,  118  ; 
his  methods  as  member  of  Jack- 
son's "literary  bureau,"  133,  135; 
Secretary  of  War,  writes  life  of 
Jackson,  182 ;  shares  influence  of 
kitchen  cabinet,  187  ;  offers  Binns 
public  printing  if  he  will  support 
Jackson,  191 ;  marries  Mrs.  Timber- 
lake  under  questionable  circum- 
stances, by  Jackson's  advice,  193, 
194  ;  attack  upon  his  wife  suspected 
by  Jackson  to  be  a  plot  to  drive 
him  from  cabinet,  196 ;  talks  with 
Lewis  about  Calhoun's  attitude 
toward  Jackson  in  1818,  199;  re- 
signs from  cabinet,  209  ;  infuriated 
at  scandal  concerning  his  wife,  211 ; 
challenges  Campbell  and  Ingham, 
211 ;  complained  of  by  Ingham, 
211 ;  plan  of  Jackson  to  make  him 
senator,  212 ;  appointed  governor 
of  Florida  and  minister  to  Spain, 
212  ;  quarrels  with  Jackson  and  be- 
comes whig,  212  ;  his  death,  212  ; 
removes  New  Hampshire  pension 
agency  from  Mason's  bank  to  Hill's, 
274 ;  revokes  order,  274 ;  orders 
pension  funds  removed  from  New 
York  branch  bank,  287  ;  at  demo- 
cratic convention  forced  by  Lewis 
to  vote  for  Van  Buren,  317. 

Edwards,  Ninian,  accuses  Crawford  of 
corruption,  106  ;  says  he  was  pro- 
mised support  from  Monroe,  Jack- 
son, Calhoun,  and  Adams,  107  n. 

Election,  of  1801,  Jefferson  charged 
with  corruption  in,  134  n. ;  of  1816, 


92,  93;  of  1824,  95-128;  steps 
in  nomination  of  Jackson,  95-100  ; 
the  candidates,  100-108;  relations 
of  candidates  to  one  another,  108; 
regular  caucus  desired  by  Crawford 
men,  109, 110 ;  congressional  caucus 
nominates  Crawford,  110,  111 ;  elec- 
toral struggles  in  various  States, 
111-113  ;  attempts  at  coalitions, 
112,  114,  116  ;  electoral  and  popu- 
lar vote,  115  ;  intrigues  in  House 
of  Representatives,  116  ;  choice 
of  Adams,  116  ;  the  corrupt  bar- 
gain story,  117-125  ;  the  demos 
Tcraleo  principle  discussed,  125- 
128 ;  its  result  changes  current  idea 
of  presidential  office,  129;  of  1828, 
early  plans  for,  136  ;  campaign 
slanders  in,  144-146;  electoral  and 
popular  votes,  148  ;  of  1832,  prepa- 
ration for,  294-299,  316-320;  vote 
in,  320,  321;  of  1836,  439-449;  of 
1844,  459,  460. 

Ellis,  Powhatan,  his  arrogant  con- 
duct as  charge  d'affaires  in  Mexico, 
421. 

Ellmaker,  Amos,  nominated  for  vice- 
presidency  by  anti-masons  at  Balti- 
more in  1831,  294,  321. 

Ellsworth,  W.  W.,  on  Bank  investi- 
gating committee,  368. 

Ely,  Rev. ,  called  before  cabinet 

by  Jackson  for  defaming  Mrs. 
Eaton,  195. 

Embargo,  its  folly  and  tyrannous 
character,  32. 

England,  its  policy  toward  United 
States,  31 ;  repeals  Orders  in  Coun- 
cil, 34  ;  its  successes  in  war  of  1812, 
49 ;  hopes  to  gain  territory,  49 ; 
action  of  its  officers  in  Florida, 
65,  66 ;  suspected  by  United  States 
of  stirring  up  Indians  in  Florida, 
72;  excludes  United  States  from 
West  India  trade,  214;  yields  to 
retaliatory  acts,  215,  216 ;  begins 
tariff  reform,  236  ;  exports  woollens 
to  United  States,  236  ;  mediates  be- 
tween France  and  United  States, 
408 ;  abolishes  slavery  in  West  In- 
dies, 410. 

Erving,  George  W.,  claims  to  have 
begun  negotiations  for  annexation 


INDEX 


of   Texas  in  1819,  415;    his    claim 

denied  by  Adams,  459. 
Everett,   A.   H.,  writes    address  for 

protectionist  convention,  261. 
Everett,   Edward,  letter  of   Madison 

to,  on  nullification,  254;  on  Bank 

investigating  committee,  368. 

FANNIN, ,  murdered  by  Mexicans, 

417. 

Federalists,  oppose  admission  of  Ten- 
nessee, 13  ;  their  exclusion  from  of- 
fice deprecated  by  Jackson,  62,  63  ; 
said  first  to  have  favored  Jackson 
for  presidency,  99 ;  convention  of, 
in  Pennsylvania,  nominates  Jackson, 
112  ;  their  hatred  of  Adams,  125  n.  ; 
join  democratic  party  against  Ad- 
ams, 130. 

Financial  history,  breakdown  of  finan- 
ces during  war  of  1812,  48,  49; 
crisis  of  1819,  93,  94 ;  demand  for 
cheap  money  in  1819, 94  ;  conduct  of 
Treasury  by  Crawford  during  panic 
of  1819,  106;  inflation  period  in 
Southwest,  155-166,  171-174;  "re- 
lief "  movement  in  Kentucky  and 
Tennessee,  157-175  ;  events  leading 
to  charter  of  second  Bank,  265,  266 ; 
history  of  second  Bank,  before  1829, 
266-272;  Jackson's  attack  on  the 
Bank,  277-281,  285-288;  tranquil- 
lity of  conditions  in  1829,  281; 
charges  against  the  Bank,  302-310  ; 
their  validity,  311-316 ;  dealings  of 
Bank  with  Barings  in  1832,  339-341 ; 
critical  situation  in  West  caused  by 
branch  drafts,  342,  343  ;  financial 
distress  caused  by  removal  of  de- 
posits, 352,  355, 360,  369-371  ;  choice 
of  deposit  banks,  356-359  ;  scandals 
in  placing  drafts  to  protect  pet 
banks,  359,  360;  hard-money  pro- 
gramme of  Jackson,  371 ,  372 ;  sound- 
ness of  currency  in  1834,  372 ;  be- 
ginning of  banking  mania,  372-374  ; 
beginning  of  speculation,  377 ;  era 
of  canals  and  internal  improve- 
ments, 378,  379  ;  stringency  in  1835, 
379  ;  increased  rise  of  prices  to  end 
of  1836,  380 ;  deposit  of  surplus 
revenue,  382,  383 ;  its  effect,  384- 
of  deposit  banks,  385, 


386  ;  advocacy  of  metallic  currency 
by  Jacksonians,  388,  389;  regula- 
tion of  coinage,  389-392  ;  over- valu- 
ation of  gold,  390;  export  of  sil- 
ver, 392 ;  specie  circular  issued, 
392  ;  its  effect  on  banks,  393,  394  ; 
veto  of  bill  to  repeal  specie  circu- 
lar, 394;  new  charter  of  Bank, 
395,  398  ;  its  rash  career  and  col- 
lapse, 400,  401;  effect  of  Briscoe 
case  upon  country,  426,  427  ;  the 
panic  of  1837,  450. 

Florida,  question  of  its  boundaries 
raised  by  purchase  of  Louisiana, 
23  ;  partly  occupied  by  United  States 
in  1810,  24 ;  possibly  the  object  of 
Burr's  schemes,  24  ;  used  as  base  of 
operations  by  English,  42,  43 ;  Jack- 
son cautioned  against  invading,  43  ; 
invaded  by  Jackson  in  1814,  43,  44  ; 
arbitrary  action  of  English  in,  65  ; 
negro  fort  in,  destroyed  by  Gaines, 
66 ;  pirates  in,  expelled  by  United 
States,  67  ;  fugitive  slaves  in,  67 ; 
desire  of  United  States  to  buy,  67 ; 
Gaines' s  invasion  of,  to  attack 
Creeks,  68,  69 ;  offer  of  Jackson  to 
conquer,  09 ;  Jackson's  invasion  of, 
71-76;  capture  of  St.  Marks,  71; 
defeat  of  Seminoles  in,  73,  74; 
political  effect  of  Jackson's  career 
in,  77,  78  ;  purchased  by  treaty  of 
1819,  84 ;  Jackson's  career  as  gov- 
ernor of,  85-90;  Jackson's  powers 
over,  86;  controversies  over  land 
grants  in,  87,  88. 

Floyd,  General  John,  sei  res  in  Creek 
war,  38. 

Floyd,  John,  of  Virginia,  electoral 
vote  for,  in  1832,  320. 

Foote,  Samuel  A.,  offers  resolution 
on  public  lands,  233. 

Force  bill,  asked  for  by  Jackson,  332  ; 
debate  upon,  334  ;  passed,  336,  337  ; 
nullified  by  South  Carolina,  337, 
338. 

Forsyth,  John,  tells  Hamilton,  on 
Crawford's  behalf,  of  Calhoun's  pro- 
posal to  censure  Jackson  in  1818, 
199;  declines  to  receive  Broglie's 
statement  of  French  case  in  1835, 
407 ;  receives  offer  of  mediatio» 
from  England,  408. 


INDEX 


483 


France,  duplicity  of  its  policy  toward 
United  States,  31 ;  war  with,  pre- 
vented by  Adams,  31 ;  question  of 
spoliation  claims  upon,  216-218; 
agrees  to  pay  claims,  217  ;  refuses 
to  pay  claims  as  agreed,  344,  402 ; 
complained  of  by  Jackson,  402, 403  ; 
anger  of,  at  Jackson's  message,  403, 
404;  recalls  minister,  405;  refuses 
to  pay  without  "  satisfactory  expla- 
nations," 405,  406;  proposal  of 
Jackson  to  exclude  its  ships,  407, 
408;  accepts  mediation  of  England, 
408  ;  pays  indemnity,  408. 

Franklin,  State  of,  an  outgrowth  of 
"  squatterism,"  9. 

Fromentin,  Eligius,  issues  habeas  cor- 
pus for  Callava,  88  ;  summoned  by 
Jackson  to  show  cause,  88 ;  his 
interview  with  Jackson,  88;  not 
upheld  by  cabinet,  90. 

Frontiersmen,  characteristics  of,  7-9  ; 
their  litigiousness,  8;  their  quar- 
relsomeness, 9  ;  adopt  squatterism 
as  government,  10 ;  live  upon  credit, 
18,  19 ;  duelling  code,  19,  20  ;  their 
inefficiency  and  insubordination  as 
troops,  38,  39. 

GAINES,  GENERAL  E.  P.,  destroys  "  Ne- 
gro Fort,"  66;  complains  to  Indians 
of  white  men  killed,  68  ;  sends  force 
to  attack  Fowltown,  68 ;  accused 
by  Mitchell  of  beginning  Seminole 
war,  68 ;  his  account  of  the  affair, 
68,  69  ;  ordered  by  Jackson  to  seize 
St.  Augustine,  80  ;  ordered  by  Ad- 
ams to  protect  Creek  lauds,  222  ; 
ordered  by  Jackson  to  enter  Texas, 
419  ;  calls  for  militia,  419  ;  recalled, 
419. 

Ballatin,  Albert,  describes  uncouth- 
ness  of  Jackson's  appearance  in 
1794,  16 ;  his  career  as  financier, 
48 ;  goes  to  Russia  as  peace  com- 
missioner, 48  ;  not  forgiven  by  de- 
mocrats for  abandoning  finances, 
48 ;  his  action  justly  criticised, 
48,  49 ;  warns  of  English  prepara- 
tions to  crush  United  States,  49  ; 
nominated  for  Vice-President,  110  ; 
still  unpopular  for  having  aban- 
doned the  Treasury  in  1812,  110; 


on  English  opinion  of  Jackson,  215  ; 
writes  address  for  free-trade  con- 
vention, 261  ;  wrongly  referred  to  as 
author  of  plan  of  transferring  large 
drafts  to  banks,  360. 

Gardner,  James  B.,  his  nomination 
rejected  by  Senate,  191. 

Georgia,  nominates  Van  Buren  for 
Vice-President,  107  ;  urges  United 
States  to  buy  Indian  lands,  220, 221  ; 
begins  to  dispose  of  Greek  lands, 
222 ;  yields  to  Adams's  prohibition, 

222  ;  dissatisfied  with  second  Creek 
treaty,  222;  demands  that  United 
States  extinguish    Cherokee    title, 

223  ;  Adams  unpopular  in,  because 
of  his  attitude  toward  Indians,  224; 
passes  law  seizing  Cherokee  lands, 

224  ;  refuses  to  obey  Supreme  Court 
in  Tassel  case,   225 ;  asks  Jackson 
to  remove  troops,  226  ;  arrests  and 
convicts    Worcester,    227;    refuses 
to  obey  Supreme  Court,  227  ;   later 
pardons  Worcester  and  others,  228  ; 
declares  tariff  and  internal  improve- 
ments   unconstitutional,    threatens 
secession,  255,  256  ;  kept  from  join- 
ing   South  Carolina  by  Crawford, 
256  ;    threatens  nullification,    257  ; 
opposes  tariff  and  nullification,  335. 

Gibbons  vs.  Ogden,  168. 

Giles,  William  B.,  controversy  with 
Adams  over  changing  party  in  1807, 
147. 

Gilmer,  Governor  George  R.,  ordered 
by  Georgia  Legislature  to  disregard 
summons  of  Supreme  Court,  226; 
denounces  tariff,  without  favoring 
secession,  256. 

"  Globe,"  its  position  as  mouthpiece 
of  Jackson,  207  ;  its  political  power, 
325,  3'26. 

Gouge,  William  M.,  denounces  banks, 
269 ;  on  fallacy  of  Biddle's  posing  as 
guardian  of  country,  315. 

Gouverneur,  Samuel,  letter  of  Ken- 
dall to,  on  exclusion  of  abolition 
matter  from  mails,  411. 

Granger,  Francis,  candidate  of  anti- 
masons  in  183G,  439  ;  nominated  for 
vice-presidency,  444 ;  vote  for,  449. 

Green,  Duff,  edits  "Telegraph"  as 
Jackson's  organ,  134,  135;  in  the 


484 


INDEX 


kitchen  cabinet,  181 ;  his  character 
and  ability,  185 ;  loyal  to  Calhoun, 
185  ;  protected  from  competition  by 
appointment  of  Kendall  through 
Calhoun's  casting  vote,  191,  192; 
sides  with  Calhoun  against  Jack- 
son, 206  ;  abandoned  by  office-hold- 
ers for  Blair's  "  Globe,"  207. 

Green  vs.  Biddle,  167. 

Grundy,  Felix,  leader  in  Tennessee 
bank  measures,  158  ;  offers  resolu- 
tions on  nullification,  333. 

HALL,  JUDGE  DOMINICK  A.,  issues  writ 
of  habeas  corpus  for  Louaillier,  55 ; 
arrested  by  Jackson,  55 ;  accused 
by  Jackson  of  inciting  to  mutiny, 
56 ;  released,  56 ;  fines  Jackson 
$1000  for  contempt  of  court,  56,  57  ; 
called  a  tyrant  by  Jackson,  57. 

Hamilton,  James,  suggests  "nullifi- 
cation," 251 ;  held  by  Jackson  to  be 
misled  by  Calhoun,  259;  presides 
over  nullification  convention,  327 ; 
willing  to  bring  on  a  conflict,  337. 

Hamilton,  James  A.,  tries  to  reconcile 
Crawford  with  Jackson,  198;  told 
by  Forsyth  of  Calhoun's  proposal 
to  censure  Jackson  in  1818,  199; 
shows  letter  to  Lewis,  199. 

Hammond,  Jabez  D.,  surprised  at 
Van  Buren's  alarm  over  States' 
rights,  139. 

Harding,  General,  remark  of  Jackson 
to,  on  his  temper,  21. 

Harper,  Robert  G.,  in  his  description 
of  election  of  1801,  accuses  Jeffer- 
son of  bribery,  134. 

Harrison,  William  H.,  nominated  for 
presidency  in  1836,  444 ;  his  char- 
acter, 445;  his  platform  in  1836, 
447,  448. 

Harvard  College,  makes  Jackson  Doc- 
tor of  Laws,  350. 

Hawkins  vs.  Birney's  Lessee,  168. 

Hayne,  Robert  Y.,  his  argument  bet- 
ter than  Webster's  on  all  but  con- 
stitutional grounds,  257  ;  answers 
nullification  proclamation,  331;  will- 
ing to  bring  on  a  conflict,  337. 

Henderson,  William,  dissuades  Jeffer- 
son from  appointing  Jackson  to  of- 
fice, 18. 


Hill,  Isaac,  in  the  kitchen  cabinet, 
181  ;  his  career  and  character,  186 ; 
favors  party  proscription,  186 ;  his 
nomination  rejected  by  Senate,  191  ; 
elected  to  Senate  with  Jackson's 
aid,  192 ;  reasons  for  his  election, 
192,  193  ;  his  profane  toast  in  honor 
of  democracy,  203,  204;  business 
and  political  rival  of  Mason,  272- 
274;  asks  for  removal  of  Mason, 
274 ;  turns  Jackson  against  Bank, 
279 ;  uses  influence  after  election 
with  greater  freedom,  323 ;  nomi- 
nated for  governor  of  New  Hamp- 
shire, 441. 

Hottinguer,  ,  takes  up  draft  ot 

Bank  on  France,  344. 

House  of  Representatives,  refuses  to 
censure  Jackson  for  execution  of 
Arbuthnot  and  Ambrister,  80 ;  ex- 
onerates Calhoun  in  Rip  Rap  affair, 
106  ;  exonerates  Crawford  from  Ed- 
wards's  charges,  106,  107 ;  in  elec- 
tion of  1824,  115-121 ;  led  by  Clay, 
115, 116 ;  investigates  "  corrupt  bar- 
gain "  of  Clay  and  Adams,  121 ;  ac- 
cused by  Benton  of  violating  will  of 
people,  125,  128  ;  impeaches  Judge 
Peck,  220 ;  debates  public  land  pol- 
icy, 233 ;  debates  tariff  in  1827, 241 ; 
takes  testimony  on  tariff,  243 ; 
passes  tariff  of  1828,  250  ;  defeats 
revision  in  1830,  258  ;  debates  tariff 
in  1832,  262,  263  ;  passes  tariff  of 
1832,  263,  264;  rejects  resolutions 
against  Bank,  285,  286  :  passes  re- 
charter  of  Bank,  319  ;  debates  tariff 
in  1833,  335;  adopts  compromise 
tariff,  337 ;  passes  force  bill,  337 ; 
resolves  that  Bank  is  safe,  343,  344  ; 
supports  removal  of  deposits,  368  ; 
reports  of  committees  to,  on  Bank, 
368 ;  passes  bill  to  repeal  specie  cir- 
cular, 394;  votes  to  sustain  Jack- 
son in  controversy  with  France,  405 ; 
struggle  in,  over  contested  election 
case,  446. 

Houston, ,  member  of  Jackson's 

"  literary  bureau,"  133. 

Houston,  Samuel,  gets  connivance  of 
Jackson  in  plot  to  free  Texas,  416 ; 
wins  battle  of  San  Jaciuto,  April  21, 
1836,  417. 


INDEX 


485 


Hunt,  Memucan,  proposes  annexation, 
421. 

Huskisson,  William,  his  tariff  policy 
in  England,  236. 

Huyghens, ,  Dutch  minister, 

threatened  with  dismissal  by  Jack- 
son, when  his  wife  cut  Mrs.  Eaton, 
194. 

ILLINOIS,  claims  right  to  public  land 
within  its  boundaries,  232,  233; 
nominates  White  for  President,  444- 

Indian  Territory,  planned  by  Porter, 
224;  established  by  Congress,  225, 
229. 

Indiana,  claims  public  lands  within 
its  boundaries,  233 ;  opposes  nullifi- 
cation, 335. 

Ingham,  S.  D.,  Jackson's  Secretary  of 
Treasury,  182 ;  one  of  Calhoun's 
friends,  183 ;  challenged  by  Eaton, 
declines  to  fight,  211 ;  complains  to 
Jackson,  211 ;  complained  to,  of 
Mason,  by  Woodbury,  271 ;  turns 
over  complaint  to  Biddle,  272 ;  Bid- 
die's  reply  to,  272,  273;  doubts  Bid- 
die's  non-partisanship,  274 ;  threat- 
ens to  remove  deposits  if  Biddle 
uses  Bank  for  political  purposes, 
276,  277  ;  evidently  wishes  to  use 
Bank  as  a  political  engine,  277  ;  later 
asserts  he  was  turned  against  Bank 
by  Kendall,  278 ;  report  on  cur- 
rency, 389. 

Internal  improvements,  opposition  of 
Jackson  to,  in  his  first  administra- 
tion, 234-236 ;  demand  for,  in  West, 
235,  378. 

International  law,  in  Ambrister  and 
Arbuthnot  case,  77-79,  83. 

Isaacs, ,  one  of  Jackson's  "  liter- 
ary bureau,"  133. 

JACKSON,  ANDREW,  father  of  Jackson, 

emigrates  to  North  Carolina  from 

Ireland,  1 ;  his  death,  2. 
Jackson,    Mrs.    Andrew,    mother    of 

Jackson,  emigrates  to  America,  1 ; 

aided   by  relatives  after  death  of 

husband,  2 ;  her  death,  3. 
Jackson,  Andrew,  ancestry,  1 ;  birth, 

2;    childhood   and   education,    2; 

wounded  by  a  British  officer,  2,  3  ; 


learns  to  hate  England,  3 ;  after  try- 
ing saddler's  trade,  studies  law,  3 : 
youthful  fondness  for  sport,  3  ;  retu 
sons  for  his  legal  studies,  5;  does 
not  succeed  in  law,  5 ;  admitted  to 
bar  in  Tennessee,  6 ;  his  duties  as 
public  prosecutor,  9,  10 ;  appointed 
by  Washington,  11  n. ;  his  energy, 
11 ;  accused  of  adultery  by  Robards, 
11,  12  ;  questionable  circumstances 
of  his  marriage,  12 ;  his  devotion  to 
his  wife's  reputation,  13  ;  member 
of  Tennessee  constitutional  conven- 
tion, 13. 

Member  of  Congress.  His  early 
services  in  Congress,  13,  14 ;  Jeifer- 
soniau  in  his  politics,  14;  votes 
against  address  to  Washington  at 
end  of  administration,  14;  votes 
against  federalist  measures,  15 ;  se- 
cures payment  of  claim  of  Tennes- 
see, 15  ;  seems  not  to  have  enjoyed 
political  life,  15 ;  his  appearance 
and  conduct  described  as  uncouth 
by  Gallatin  and  Jefferson,  16 ;  later 
In  life,  of  distinguished  bearing,  16. 

Tennessee  Politician.  Serves  as 
Judge  of  Superior  Courts,  16  ;  quar- 
rels with  Sevier,  16 ;  elected  major- 
general  over  Sevier,  17  ;  gains  popu- 
larity by  his  courage,  17 ;  his  illit- 
eracy, 17  ;  trustee  of  Nashville 
Academy,  17 ;  candidate  for  gov- 
ernorship of  Louisiana,  18  ;  returns 
to  business  and  store-keeping,  18 ; 
financial  embarrassments,  19;  be- 
comes a  confirmed  duellist,  20  ;  his 
quarrelsomeness,  20 ;  duels  with 
Avery  and  others,  20,  21 ;  kills  Dick- 
inson, 21 ;  contracts  to  furnish  Burr 
with  boats,  22 ;  mystified  as  to 
Burr's  plans,  25 ;  eventually  turns 
against  him,  25,  26 ;  then,  won  over 
by  Burr,  speaks  against  Jefferson, 
26 ;  influenced  by  his  personal  dis- 
like of  Wilkinson,  26  ;  resents  inter- 
ference of  Dinsmore  with  his  illicit 
negro  trade,  27  ;  secures  Dinsmore's 
removal  and  ruin,  27  ;  later  refuses 
to  be  reconciled,  27  ;  his  character- 
istics in  1812,  28,  29;  his  intense 
personal  feeling  in  ev»'y  matter, 
28,29. 


486 


INDEX 


Military  Career.  Offers  services 
at  outbreak  of  war,  35 ;  organizes 
forces  in  Louisiana,  35;  offers  to 
seize  Florida,  35 ;  quarrels  with 
Wilkinson,  35;  ordered  to  disband 
men,  35 ;  transports  them  on  his 
own  responsibility,  36;  his  feud 
and  fight  with  the  Bentons,  36; 
appointed  major-general  to  serve 
against  Creeks,  37 ;  quarrels  with 
his  colleagues,  38 ;  quarrels  with  sol- 
diers over  terms  of  enlistment,  39 ; 
shows  able  leadership,  39 ;  his  tire- 
less energy  against  enemies,  39,  40 ; 
gains  popularity,  40  ;  orders  Wood 
shot  for  insubordination,  40 ;  his 
act  justified,  40, 41 ;  defeats  Creeks, 
41 ;  appointed  major  -  general  in 
federal  army,  42  ;  establishes  head- 
quarters at  Mobile,  42  ;  asks  permis- 
sion to  attack  Pensacola,  43;  his 
arrogant  tone  toward  Secretary  of 
War,  43;  repulses  English,  43; 
storms  Pensacola,  44  ;  prepares  de- 
fence of  New  Orleans,  44,  45;  his 
energy  and  success,  45 ;  denounces 
English  for  seeking  alliance  with 
pirates,  then  praises  latter  for  join- 
ing Americans,  45,  46 ;  his  bom- 
bastic proclamations,  46 ;  his  good 
fortune  in  battle  of  New  Orleans, 
46 ;  accuses  Kentucky  troops  of 
cowardice,  46,  47 ;  gains  all  the 
credit  of  the  victory,  50 ;  his  enor- 
mous popularity,  50 ;  orders  more 
executions  for  mutiny,  52 ;  later 
tries  to  evade  responsibility,  52,  53  ; 
maintains  vigorous  defence  until 
end  of  war,  53;  continues  to  rule 
arbitrarily  by  martial  law,  53,  54 ; 
his  contempt  for  French  inhabitants, 
54 ;  refuses  to  abolish  martial  law, 
54,  55 ;  orders  French  out  of  city, 
54  ;  arrests  Louaillier  for  attacking 
him  in  newspapers,  55;  arrests 
Hall  for  issuing  habeas  corpus  to 
Louaillier,  55;  accuses  Hall  of 
"forgery,"  56;  disbands  militia, 
56  ;  arrests  United  States  District 
Attorney  and  State  Judge  for  issu- 
ing habeas  corpus  for  Hall,  56 ;  dis- 
approves of  acquittal  of  Louaillier 
by  court-martial,  56 ;  retains  him  iu 


prison,  56 ;  refuses  to  defend  him- 
self when  charged  with  contempt  of 
court,  57  ;  fined  $1000,  57  ;  his  fine 
later  refunded  by  Congress  at  Ty- 
ler's suggestion,  57  ;  accuses  Hall  of 
tyranny  and  usurpation,  57  ;  causes 
needless  trouble  by  his  obstinate 
pugnacity,  58  ;  called  upon  by  Dal- 
las to  explain,  59;  later  dealings 
with  War  Department,  59. 

Career  in  Florida,  Favors  Mon- 
roe against  Crawford  in  1816,  60; 
angry  with  Crawford  for  modifying 
terms  of  his  treaty  with  Creeks,  60  5 
resumes  negotiations  and  gains  pop- 
ularity, 60 ;  urges  appointment  oi 
Drayton  as  Secretary  of  War,  60, 
61 ;  important  letters  written  for 
him  by  Lewis,  61 ;  these  letters 
subsequently  published  in  his  in- 
terest, 62 ;  urges  Monroe  not  to 
proscribe  federalists,  63 ;  declares 
he  would  have  hanged  leaders  of 
Hartford  convention,  63 ;  reply  of 
Monroe  to,  63  ;  orders  subordinates 
to  obey  no  order  not  sent  through 
him,  63  ;  his  point  conceded  by  Cal- 
houn,  64  ;  calls  Scott  to  account  for 
criticising  his  action,  64  ;  challenges 
Scott  to  a  duel,  64  ;  ordered  to  com- 
mand in  Georgia,  69  ;  offers  to  seize 
Florida,  69  ;  considers  himself  au- 
thorized to  do  so,  70  ;  alleges  a  let- 
ter from  Rhea,  70  ;  raises  troops  in 
Tennessee  on  his  own  responsibility, 
70 ;  advances  to  Florida  frontier, 
71 ;  threatens  Spanish  commander 
with  hostilities,  71 ;  captures  St. 
Mark's,  71  ;  purposes  to  pursue  In- 
dians until  he  should  catch  them, 
71 ;  assumes  that  Spanish  aid  and 
English  instigate  Indians,  71,  72; 
seizes  Arbuthnot,  72 ;  orders  Indian 
chiefs  hanged,  73  ;  fails  to  capture 
Seminole  chief  owing  to  Arbuthnot'a 
warning,  73 ;  captures  Ambrister, 
74  ;  orders  both  prisoners  executed, 
74,  75 ;  captures  Pensacola,  75 ; 
quarrels  with  Governor  of  Georgia, 
75 ;  acts  throughout  on  prejftdices 
and  assumptions,  75,  76  ;  success  of 
his  campaign,  76  ;  embarrasses  Mon- 
roe by  his  action,  77  ;  interprets  in* 


INDEX 


487 


ternational  law  to  suit  himself,  77, 
78 ;  upheld  by  popular  approval, 
79 ;  motion  to  censure  rejected  by 
House  of  Representatives,  80  ;  Cal- 
houn  wishes  him  censured,  80  ;  all 
of  cabinet  except  Adams  prepared 
to  disavow  him,  80 ;  defended  by 
Adams,  80 ;  congratulated  by  Cal- 
houn,  81 ;  suspects  Crawford  of  be- 
ing his  enemy  in  cabinet,  81 ;  cor- 
respondence with  Monroe,  81 ;  at- 
tacked by  Clay,  81 ;  and  by  Craw- 
ford's friends,  82;  vindicated  by 
Adams,  82,  83 ;  on  friendly  terms 
with  Adams,  82  ;  proposal  of  Adams 
to  make  him  Vice-President,  82  ; 
condemned  by  Senate  report,  83  ; 
visits  the  East,  excites  popular  in- 
terest, 83,  84 ;  consulted  by  Adams 
regarding  Louisiana  boundary,  84  ; 
willing  to  abandon  Texas  claim,  84 ; 
later  denies  this  consultation,  85; 
appointed  Governor  of  Florida,  85  ; 
takes  leave  of  army,  85  ;  criticises 
Brown  in  general  orders,  85,  86 ; 
becomes  a  privileged  character,  86  ; 
his  anomalous  situation  in  Florida, 
86 ;  orders  arrest  of  Spanish  ex- 
Governor  on  suspicion  of  concealing 
land  grants,  87  ;  quarrels  with  judge 
for  issuing  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
for  Callava,  88 ;  orders  friends  of 
Callava  out  of  Florida,  88  ;  consid- 
ers himself  to  be  acting  with  caution 
and  prudence,  89  ;  disgusted  with 
situation,  resigns,  89  ;  dangers  of 
absolute  power  in  his  hands,  89; 
vindicated  by  cabinet,  90  ;  retains 
popularity,  90 ;  declines  mission  to 
Mexico,  90 ;  Jefferson's  opinion  of 
his  diplomatic  ability,  91. 

United  States  Senator.  Elected  to 
succeed  Williams,  95;  pushed  for- 
ward by  Lewis  and  others,  95  ;  his 
cautious  letter  on  the  tariff,  95 ;  his 
own  opinion  favorable  to  protec- 
tion, 96  ;  votes  for  internal  im- 
provements, 96  ;  becomes  candi- 
date for  presidency,  96  ;  his  popular 
strength  realized  by  Lewis,  97  ; 
methods  of  influencing  him  by  Lewis, 
98;  his  candidacy  suggested  by  Burr,  , 
99  ;  denies  that  his  candidacy  origi- 1 


nated  with  federalists,  99;  his 
strength  early  recognized  by  Adams, 
99;  at  first  rejects  idea  of  candi- 
dacy, 100 ;  progress  of  campaign 
for,  99,  100  ;  his  only  successes,  so 
far,  military,  100 ;  his  personal  up- 
rightness and  purity,  101,  102;  re- 
ceives one  vote  in  republican  cau- 
cus, 110  ;  nominated  by  a  federalist 
convention  in  Pennsylvania,  112  ; 
makes  an  agreement  with  Calhoun, 
112,  113  ;  nominated  by  Pennsylva- 
nia republicans,  113  ;  considered 
unfit  by  "  Albany  Argus,"  113  ;  his 
election  dreaded  by  Jefferson,  114; 
popular  with  ladies  on  account  of 
his  manners,  114;  reconciled  with 
Scott,  Clay,  and  Benton,  114 ;  vote 
for,  in  election,  115  ;  his  popularity 
in  Pennsylvania,  115 ;  defeated  in 
election  by  House,  116  ;  at  first 
takes  defeat  calmly,  116,  117  ; 
adopts,  at  his  friends'  suggestion, 
the  cry  of  a  corrupt  bargain  against 
Clay,  118,  119  ;  considers  Clay  a 
political  gambler,  119;  writes  let- 
ters against  Clay,  121  ;  does  not 
condemn  Adams,  122  ;  on  returning 
home,  spreads  story,  122 ;  becomes 
zealous  to  punish  his  enemies,  122 ; 
charges  Clay  with  having  tried  to 
bargain  with  him,  122  ;  called  upon 
by  Clay  for  proof,  names  Buchanan 
as  authority,  123  ;  refuses  to  re- 
tract, 123;  late  in  life  reiterates 
charge,  123  ;  held  to  have  been  can- 
didate of  "  the  people,"  125-127. 
Leader  of  a  New  Party.  Recog- 
nized as  coming  man,  129  ;  his 
campaign  managed  by  Van  Bu- 
ren,  129,  130  ;  his  relations  with 
Randolph,  131 ;  "  literary  bureau  " 
for,  133;  nominated  by  Tennessee 
Legislature,  134 ;  resigns  senator- 
ship,  134;  suggests  amendment  to 
Constitution  to  prevent  presiden- 
tial corruption,  134  ;  progress  of 
campaign  for,  in  Congress,  135, 136 ; 
slandered  in  campaign  of  1828,  144, 
145 ;  vote  for,  in  election,  148, 149  ; 
believes  his  election  a  rebuke  to 
a  corrupt  administration,  149  ;  calls 
"  relief  "  bills  wicked,  corrupt,  un- 


488 


INDEX 


constitutional,  157,  158  ;  other  let- 
ters denouncing  inflation,  159  ;  sup- 
ported by  "  relief  "  party  in  Ken- 
tucky, 174. 

President  of  the  United  Stales. 
Represents  a  new  upheaval  of  de- 
mocracy, 176;  his  popularity  due 
largely  to  his  lack  of  social  polish, 
178,  179  ;  refuses  to  call  on  Adams, 
179 ;  his  inaugural,  180 ;  not  ham- 
pered by  a  political  record,  180 ;  ex- 
pected by  Calhoun  to  serve  one 
term  only,  181 ;  considers  cabinet 
officers  mere  clerks,  181 ;  instead 
of  being  led  by  them,  relies  on 
kitchen  cabinet,  181  ;  does  not  hold 
cabinet  meetings,  181 ;  his  cabinet 
not  strong,  182  ;  appoints  Lewis 
Second  Auditor,  183  ;  favors  Ken- 
dall as  an  enemy  of  Clay,  184  ; 
aided  by  Lewis,  Kendall,  Hill,  and 
Green,  187;  considers  civil  service 
full  of  corruption,  188;  his  bitter- 
ness against  a  defaulter,  189  n. ;  not 
the  author  of  spoils  system,  190  ; 
his  appointments  in  one  year  dis- 
cussed, 190,  191 ;  appoints  members 
of  Congress,  191  ;  some  of  his 
worst  nominations  rejected,  191 ;  his 
rage,  192 ;  insists  on  election  of  Hill 
to  Senate,  which  had  rejected  his 
nomination,  192;  advises  Eaton  as 
to  his  marriage,  193  ;  tries  to  force 
society  to  recognize  Mrs.  Eaton, 
194-197  ;  makes  it  a  political  ques- 
tion, 194 ;  declares  unqualifiedly  in 
favor  of  Mrs.  Eaton,  195  ;  tries  to 
break  down  evidence  of  two  clergy- 
men, 1(J5 ;  his  heart  won  by  Van 
Buren's  courtesies,  196  ;  alienated 
from  Calhoun,  196;  doubtful  as  to 
Calhoun's  loyalty,  196  ;  asserts  .at- 
tack on  Mrs.  Eaton  to  be  an  effort 
to  drive  Eaton  out  of  cabinet,  1%  ; 
ascribes  it  to  Clay,  196  ;  still  thinks 
Calhonn  his  friend  in  Florida  affair, 
197  ;  efforts  of  Crawford  to  preju- 
dice against  Calhonn,  198 ;  attempt 
to  reconcile  with  Crawford  in  1  $28, 
199 ;  gives  dinner  to  Monroe,  190  ; 
learns  of  Crawford's  statement  as 
to  Calhoun's  enmity  in  1819,  200 ; 
not  allowed  to  see  letter  by  his 


managers,  200 ;  plan  of  managers 
to  reelect,  and  to  have  Van  Buren 
his  successor,  200,  201  ;  fearing  his 
death,  his  managers  induce  him  to 
write  a  letter  favoring  Van  Buren 
and  disparaging  Calhoun,  201  ;  ad- 
dress for  his  renomination  secured 
from  Pennsylvania  Legislature,  202  ; 
renominated  by  other  Legislatures, 
202,  203  ;  his  Union  toast  at  Jeffer- 
son's birthday  banquet,  203  ;  a  ques- 
tion how  much  his  ill-will  toward 
Calhoun  influenced  his  attitude 
on  nullification,  203 ;  on  receiving 
Crawford's  account  of  Calhoun's 
action  in  Monroe's  cabinet,  demands 
an  explanation,  204  ;  accuses  Cal- 
houn of  perfidy,  204 ;  bases  his  at- 
tack on  the  supposed  Ilhea  letter, 
205;  declares  a  breach  with  Cal- 
houn, 205  ;  sends  Calhoun's  letter 
to  Van  Buren,  206  ;  repudiates  Duff 
Green,  206 ;  secures  Blair  as  mouth- 
piece, 207  ;  compels  departments 
to  give  Blair  printing,  208 ;  de- 
scribes varying  receptions  of  Batons 
in  Tennessee,  208  ;  his  quarrel 
with  Calhoun  becomes  known,  209  ; 
resignation  of  his  cabinet,  209  ; 
dismisses  Calhoun's  friends,  210  ; 
appoints  Van  Buren  minister  to 
England,  210 ;  his  rage  at  the  Sen- 
ate's rejection  of  Van  Buren,  211; 
his  campaign  for  Mrs.  Eaton  fails, 

211  ;    wishes  White  to  resign  from 
Senate  in  order  to  give  Eaton  his 
place,  212;    quarrels   -vith  White. 

212  ;    appoints  Eaton  governor   of 
Florida  and  minister  to  Spain,  212 ; 
later  quarrels  with  Eaton,  212;  his 
new  cabinet  composed  of  firm  fol- 
lowers, 212;  sends  MeLanf  to  nrge 
England  to  allow  West  India  trade, 
215 ;    proclaims    opening   of    West 
Indies,  21");   question  of  hi,s  diplo- 
matic success,  215,  216 :  sends  Rives 
to  Franne  to  push  spoliation  claims, 
217  ;  threatens  war,  217  ;  gains  pop- 
ularity,   218  ;    favors    acquittal   of 
Judge    Peck    when    impeached    by 
Buchanan,  220  ;  his  attitude  toward 
Creeks  and  Cherokees,  224  ;  refuses 
to  protect  Indians  against  Georgia 


INDEX 


tews,  225 ;  withdraws  federal  troops 
from  Georgia,  226;. refuses  to  en- 
force Cherokoe  treaties,  226 ;  re- 
fuses to  enforce  Supreme  Court  de- 
cisions, 227  and  n.  ;  declares  him- 
self ready  to  submit  his  conduct  to 
people,  227  ;  has  no  settled  pol- 
icy in  regard  to  public  lands,  233 ; 
his  Maysville  road  veto,  234,  235  ; 
courage  of  his  attitude,  235  ;  vetoes 
other  internal  improvement  bills, 
yet  signs  some,  236  ;  recommends 
sale  of  all  stock  held  by  United 
States,  235  ;  disappoints  Southern- 
ers by  his  attitude  toward  nullifica- 
tion, 259;  letter  showing  how  he 
was  influenced  by  hatred  of  Cal- 
houn,  259  ;  in  1831  intimates  inten- 
tion of  using  force  against  nullifica- 
tion, 260  ;  denounced  by  Hayne, 
260 ;  recommends  reduction  of  tariff 
because  of  surplus,  263  ;  said  by 
Ingham  to  object  to  Bank  at  begin- 
ning of  term,  278 ;  doubtfulness  of 
this  assertion,  279 ;  turned  against 
Bank  by  Hill,  Kendall,  and  Blair, 
279  ;  in  first  annual  message  ques- 
tions soundness  and  constitutution- 
ality  of  Bank,  281 ;  effects  of  his 
statement,  282  ;  novelty  of  his  as- 
suming to  speak  for  fellow-citizens, 
282 ;  his  words  really  meaningless, 
283 ;  causes  decline  in  Bank  stock, 
284  ;  his  proposed  substitute  con- 
demned by  House  committee,  284; 
his  party  not  opposed  to  Bank  at 
this  time,  285;  renews  suggestions 
in  1830  without  success,  286 ;  later 
denies  having  meant  a  government 
paper  currency,  286,  287 ;  refers  to 
Bank  question  as  closed  in  1831, 
288;  opposed  as  a  mason  by  anti- 
masonic  faction  in  New  York,  292  ; 
in  1832  stands  as  leader  of  a  new 
democratic  party,  296;  review  of 
his  policy  to  this  point,  296,  297  ; 
attacked  by  Clay  as  danger  to  the 
Bank,  297  ;  aroused  by  this  into  ac- 
tive hostility  to  Bank,  299  ;  gains 
popularity  by  his  boldness,  299  ;  not 
damaged  in  Pennsylvania  by  his 
Bank  action,  316  ;  forces  Van  Bu- 
ren's  nomination  for  Vice-Presi- 


dent,  317,  318 ;  refuses  to  consider 
an  offer  from  Biddle  to  compromise, 
318  ;  vetoes  Bank  recharter,  319  ; 
his  reasons,  319,  320  ;  gains  support 
of  private  and  State  banks,  320  ; 
reflected  in  1832,  320,  321 ;  consid- 
ers himself  as  vindicated  in  every 
respect  by  election,  322,  323;  his 
increasing  self-confidence,  323  ; 
managed  with  greater  freedom  by 
kitchen  cabinet,  323,  324;  his  gov- 
ernment purely  a  personal  one,  324, 
325 ;  his  theory  degrades  republi- 
can institutions,  325  ;  his  despotic 
use  of  the  "  Globe,"  325,  326 ;  or- 
ders Scott  to  prepare  for  violence 
at  Charleston,  323  ;  issues  nullifi- 
cation proclamation,  328,  329;  not 
responsible  for  either  its  form  or  its 
doctrine,  329 ;  becomes  for  once  a 
national  hero,  329,  330  ;  appears  in- 
consistent to  milliners,  330;  his 
managers  alarmed  by  its  tone,  330  ; 
justifies  protection  by  war  argu- 
ment, 332  ;  asks  for  power  to  en- 
force laws,  332  ;  charged  by  South 
Carolina  with  tyranny,  337  ;  said  to 
have  terrified  Calhoun  by  threats 
of  hanging,  338  ;  his  increasing  ani- 
mosity toward  Bank,  339  ;  urges 
Congress  to  investigate,  341  ;  ap- 
points Duane  Secretary  of  Treasury, 
his  motives,  345,  346  ;  advised  by 
Taney  to  remove  deposits,  346 ;  used 
by  Kendall  and  Blair  as  tool,  347 ; 
inspired  by  them  with  idea  of 
Bank's  corrupting  Congress,  348, 
349  ;  abandons  Jeff ersonian  ideas  in 
order  to  "  save  the  country,"  349 ; 
his  tour  in  New  England,  350  ;  his 
degree  from  Harvard,  350  ;  bit- 
ter comments  of  Adams  upon,  350 ; 
tries  to  persuade  Duane  to  remove 
deposits,  350,  351 ;  encouraged  by 
Taney  to  persevere,  351  ;  assaulted 
by  Lieutenant  Randolph,  351  n.  ; 
gains  conviction  that  Bank  is  finan- 
cially weak,  352  ;  offers  to  Duane 
to  take  the  responsibility,  353,  354  ; 
reads  paper  to  cabinet,  354  ;  dis- 
misses Duane,  354  ;  transfers  Taney, 
354;  attacked  by  Duane,  355;  in 
message  of  1833  attacks  Bank  again 


490 


INDEX 


as  a  political  engine,  360;  charges 
Bank  with  manufacturing  a  panic, 
SCO;  indignant  at  rejection  of  his 
nominations  by  Senate,  362 ;  refuses 
call  of  Senate  for  paper  read  to 
cabinet,  362 ;  avows  himself  respon- 
sible to  the  people,  363 ;  complains 
that  Bank  still  holds  papers  of  pen- 
sion agency,  363  ;  censured  by  Sen- 
ate, 364  ;  protests  against  censure 
as  unconstitutional,  364;  resolu- 
tions against,  expunged,  367  ;  more 
gratified  by  this  than  by  any  other 
incident  of  his  life,  367  ;  receives 
"  distress  delegations  "  with  rage, 
371 ;  suggests  a  hard-money  pro- 
gramme, 371,  372;  in  message  of 
1834  urges  further  measures  to  pun 
Ish  Bank,  374  ;  in  1835  repeats 
charges  that  Bank  is  anti-demo- 
cratic, 375 ;  proposes  sale  of  public 
lands  to  new  States  and  to  actual 
settlers,  380;  vetoes  Clay's  land 
bill,  381 ;  signs  bill  to  deposit  sur- 
plus, 381 ;  his  objections  to  it,  382, 
383 ;  did  not  veto  because  of  com- 
ing election,  383 ;  argues  for  reduc- 
tion of  revenue,  384;  orders  issue 
of  specie  circular,  392 ;  vetoes  bill 
to  annul  specie  circular,  394 ;  sends 
his  reasons  to  State  Department, 
394 ;  his  course  in  Bank  war 
summed  up,  397  ;  his  charges 
against  Bank  unproved,  397  ;  ques- 
tion whether  his  course  was  justi- 
fied by  later  history  of  the  Bank, 
398;  in  his  last  message  condemns 
Bank,  400 ;  reports  to  Congress  neg- 
lect of  France  to  pay  treaty  claims, 
402;  urged  by  Livingston  to  adopt 
a  vigorous  tone,  403  ;  suggests  pos- 
sible reprisals,  404  ;  sustained  in 
Congress  by  Adams,  405;  in  1835 
declares  he  meant  no  menace,  407  ; 
directs  Barton  to  ask  intentions  of 
France,  407 ;  again  recommends  co- 
ercion, 407  ;  proposes  commercial 
non  -  intercourse,  407  ;  transmits 
France's  conciliatory  message  to 
Congress,  408 ;  appoints  Kendall  to 
succeed  Barry  as  Postmaster-Gen- 
eral, 409;  expected  by  the  South 
to  secure  Texas,  415 ;  probably  con- 


nives at  Houston's  plan  to  revolu- 
tionize Texas,  416 ;  otters  to  buy 
Texas,  416,  417 ;  later  says  he  was 
prevented  by  Adams  from  annexing 
Texas  hi  1836,  418  ;  orders  General 
Gaines  to  enter  Texas,  418,  419  ; 
wishes  Gaines  to  repeat  his  own  ex- 
ploits of  1818,  419;  recommends 
delay  in  recognition  of  Texas,  419  ; 
submits  report  of  agent  on  Texan 
boundary  claims,  420 ;  fosters  swag- 
gering, filibustering  spirit  in  army 
and  navy,  422  ;  appoints  new  jus- 
tices of  Supreme  Court,  424  ;  his 
appointments  alter  course  of  con- 
stitutional development,  427  ;  his 
influence  upon  violence  and  lawless- 
ness, 430 ;  attempt  of  Lawrence  to 
assassinate,  432 ;  accuses  Poindex- 
ter  of  instigating  the  attempt,  432 ; 
his  charges  frivolous,  433  ;  accused 
of  toryism  by  whigs,  439;  consid- 
ered for  a  third  term,  440 ;  recom- 
mends a  party  convention,  440  ;  un- 
able to  make  Tennessee  support 
Van  Buren,  441 ;  denounces  White 
as  a  traitor,  441 ;  announcement  by 
Van  Buren  of  purpose  to  follow 
Jackson's  course  if  elected,  442  ; 
attempt  of  whigs  to  rival  by  nomi- 
nation of  Harrison,  445  ;  favors 
Michigan  in  boundary  controversy, 
446  ;  consequences  of  his  acts  fall 
upon  Van  Buren,  450,  451  ;  rejoices 
at  inauguration  of  Van  Buren  as  a 
personal  triumph,  452. 
In  Retirement.  Retu'-ns  to  Ten- 
nessee, his  popularity,  452;  yet 
does  not  exercise  direct  influence 
at  Washington,  453 ;  aided  in  pecu- 
niary troubles  by  Lewis  and  Blair, 
453 ;  mortified  at  Swartwout's  de- 
falcation, 454;  wishes  Lewis  to  re- 
sign his  office  in  1839,  454,  455; 
rejoices  at  Tyler's  financial  policy, 
456,  457  ;  his  keen  interest  in  Texas 
annexation,  457  ;  bitter  remarks  on 
Adams,  457,  458 ;  his  letter  of  1843 
favoring  Texas  annexation,  used 
against  Van  Buren,  458  ;  repeats 
his  disapproval  of  treaty  of  1819, 
458  ;  controversy  with  Adams  on 
this  point,  459 ;  speculates  on  eleo 


INDEX 


491 


tion  of  1844,  still  hopes  Van  Buren 
will  be  nominated,  459 ;  later  sup- 
ports Polk,  460 ;  mortified  that 
Clay  carries  Tennessee,  460  ;  death, 
summary  of  his  career,  460 ;  never 
forgives  an  enemy  to  the  end,  460. 

Personal  Qualities.  General  views, 
100,  460  ;  ambition,  5,  100, 101, 112 ; 
arrogance,  53, 56,  64,  79,  85,  89,  101, 
323  ;  chivalrousness,  193, 195,  208 ; 
courage,  10,  41  ;  diplomatic  ability, 
91,  215;  fidelity,  13,  28,  179,  190, 
192,  317  ;  illiteracy,  16,  17,  101  ; 
manners,  16,  20,  101,  114  ;  military 
ability,  35,  39,  41,  44 ;  morals,  101, 
102 ;  passionateness,  16,  18,  21,  58, 
65,  87,  114 ;  personal  appearance, 
16  ;  pride,  3,  28,  35,  64  ;  persistency, 
10,  11,  39,  47,  56-58,  76,  98,  339  ; 
pugnacity,  13,  17,  18,  20,  27,  35,  36, 
38,  58,  64,  75,  91, 194,  299,  337  ;  self- 
centred  habit,  26,  43,  60,  72,  76,  81, 
122, 194, 322, 324,  432,  433 ;  severity, 
40,  52,  54,  55,  75 ;  susceptibility  to 
advice,  98,  118,  201,  285,  324,  349; 
vigor,  28,  35,  39,  44-46,  50,  53  ;  vin- 
dictiveness,  179,  189  n.,  318,  339, 
452. 

Political  Opinions.  Ambrister  and 
Arbuthnot  case,  77  ;  Bank,  281,  285, 
288,  299,  318-320,  339,  340,  350-354, 
360,  363,  374,  375,  400  ;  cabinet, 
353,  354,  362;  censure,  resolutions 
of,  364  ;  democracy,  Jeffersonian, 
14,  176,  296 ;  election  of  1824,  117, 
119,  121-123  ;  election  of  1844,  459  ; 
England,  72  ;  expunging  resolution, 
367  ;  federalists,  14, 15  ;  Florida,  42, 
43,  69,  70,  204  ;  French  spoliation 
claims,  217,  402-108 ;  Hartford  con- 
vention, 63  ;  Indians,  226  ;  internal 
improvements,  234-236  ;  judiciary, 
220,  227,  427  ;  lands,  public,  380 ; 
Michigan  boundary,  447  ;  money, 
286,  287,  371,  372,  392,  394,  456  ; 
nullification,  203,  259,  328,  332  ; 
office,  appointments  to,  63, 134,  188, 
191,  192;  party  conventions,  440; 
Presidency,  282,  322-325,  353,  362, 
363 ;  relief  system,  157-159  ;  Swart- 
wout  charges  of  corrupt  bargaining, 
453,  454  ;  surplus,  distribution  of, 
233,  381-S84  ;  tariff,  96,  263  ;  Texas, 


416,  418-420,  457,  458 ;  West  India 
trade,  215. 

Jaudon, ,  agent  of  Bank  in  Eng- 
land, 399. 

Jefferson,  Thomas,  describes  Jack- 
eon's  inability  to  control  himself 
while  in  the  Senate,  16 ;  refuses  to 
appoint  Jackson  governor  of  Louisi- 
ana, 18  ;  his  conduct  toward  Burr 
denounced  by  Jackson,  26 ;  his  in- 
definite foreign  policy,  31 ;  his  com- 
mercial warfare  criticised,  32,  33  ; 
his  character  womanish,  33 ;  aban- 
dons attempt  to  control  govern- 
ment after  breakdown  of  his  policy, 
33  ;  on  Jackson's  diplomatic  unfit- 
ness,  91  ;  considers  Jackson  a  dan- 
gerous man  for  President,  114  ;  ac- 
cused by  Harper  of  having  bought 
election  of  1801  by  appointments, 
134  ;  his  use  of  term  "  nullifica- 
tion," 252 ;  his  responsibility  for 
events  of  1832,  255. 

Johnson,  Richard  M.,  votes  not  to 
nominate  a  caucus  candidate  in 
1820,  92;  proposes  to  amend  Con- 
stitution so  as  to  give  appellate  ju- 
risdiction to  Senate  where  a  State 
is  a  party,  161 ;  on  Jackson's  behalf, 
tries  to  persuade  secretaries  to 
force  their  wives  to  recognize  Mrs. 
Eaton,  194 ;  signs  report  of  com- 
mittee against  Bank  without  know- 
ing facts,  302  ;  nominated  for  Vice- 
President,  442  ;  refusal  of  Virginia 
to  support,  442  ;  his  letter  of  ac- 
ceptance, 442 ;  his  career  and  char- 
acter, 443  ;  vote  for,  in  1836,  448  ; 
elected  Vice-President,  449. 

Johnson,  W.  C.,  president  of  young 
men's  convention,  318. 

Johnson,  William,  member  of  Su- 
preme Court,  his  death,  423. 

Jones,  William,  originates  plan  oi 
transferring  drafts  to  deposit  banks, 
360. 

KENDALL,  AMOS,  supports  Clay,  then 
Adams,  in  1825,  120  ;  in  the  kitchen 
cabinet,  181 ;  his  career  and  char- 
acter, 183 ;  quarrels  with  Clay,  183, 
184;  responsible  for  Jackson's  worst 
errors,  184 ;  appointed  Fourth  Au« 


492 


INDEX 


ditor,  184;  description  by  Harriet 
Martineau  of  his  great  and  mysteri- 
ous influence,  184 ;  his  importance 
described  by  Claiborne,  185 ;  not  a 
spoilsman  at  the  outset,  188 ;  his 
nomination  confirmed  by  Calhoun 
for  personal  reasons,  191,  192 ;  ori- 
ginally a  States'  rights  man,  later 
Unionist,  203 ;  brings  Blair  to  edit 
an  administration  paper,  206 ;  forces 
office-holders  to  subscribe  to  it,  207 ; 
gives  questionable  evidence  as  to 
political  partisanship  of  Bank,  278, 
279  ;  poisons  Jackson's  mind  against 
Bank,  279 ;  announces  Jackson's  in- 
tention of  attacking  Bank,  279,  280  ; 
suggests  a  paper  currency,  280, 284 ; 
at  Lewis's  suggestion,  arranges  that 
New  Hampshire  Legislature  pro- 
pose a  national  democratic  conven- 
tion, 317 ;  writes  address  for  con- 
vention, 318  ;  shows  increased  con- 
fidence in  managing  Jackson,  323; 
tries  to  persuade  McLane  to  re- 
move deposits,  346 ;  persuades  Van 
Buren,  346,  347  ;  the  moving  spirit 
in  attack  on  Bank,  his  motives,  347; 
tries  to  persuade  Duane,  350;  asks 
local  banks  to  be  ready  to  receive 
deposits,  351 ;  alleged  by  Rives  to 
have  advised  Jackson  to  abandon 
project,  352;  reports  on  banks  to 
receive  deposits,  356 ;  refuses  to  or- 
ganize deposit  system,  358 ;  suc- 
ceeds Barry  as  Postmaster-General, 
409;  reorganizes  department,  409; 
his  position  on  abolition  matter  in 
mails,  411,  412;  his  appointment 
confirmed,  412. 

Kendall,  Amos,  his  "  Life  of  Jackson ' ' 
quoted,  2,  5,  10. 

Kentucky,  favors  Jackson  after  Clay 
in  1824,  115;  "relief"  movement 
in,  152-155,  160-166, 171-174 ;  strug- 
gle in,  between  judiciary  and  Legis- 
lature, over  land  titles,  153 ;  fails  to 
remove  judges,  153 ;  sells  land  on 
credit,  153 ;  repeals  old-age  pen- 
sions, 154 ;  passes  law  against  citing 
English  law  reports  in  court,  154 ; 
charters  banks,  155 ;  financial  crisis 
in,  160;  tries  to  tax  United  States 
Bank,  160;  passes  "relief1  mea- 


sures and  charters  new  State  bank, 
161,  102  ;  its  replevin  law  declared 
unconstitutional,  162,  164;  fails  to 
remove  judges,  163 ;  ruins  Bank  of 
Kentucky,  163 ;  struggle  in,  to  re- 
move judges,  164  ;  creates  a  new 
Court  of  Appeals  to  supersede  old 
one,  164,  165 ;  struggle  between 
"Old"  and  "New"  Courts,  165, 
172, 173  ;  loses  people,  165 ;  angered 
by  United  States  Supreme  Court 
decisions,  167-169  ;  message  of  Gov- 
ernor Desha  against  Bank  and  Su- 
preme Court,  171,  172 ;  damaging 
effect  of  Bank  of  Commonwealth 
in,  173,  174;  continues  to  be  di- 
vided into  relief  and  anti-relief  par- 
ties, 174;  its  representatives  in 
Congress  lead  attack  on  federal  ju- 
diciary, 218,  219. 

Kentucky  resolutions  of  1798  and  1799, 
their  relation  to  nullification,  252, 
253. 

Kitchen  cabinet,  its  composition,  181, 
183-187  ;  its  control  over  Jackson, 
187  ;  objected  to  by  Duane,  347,  348 

Kremer,  George,  takes  responsibility 
for  corruption  story,  120,  121 ;  de- 
clines to  testify,  121 ;  not  the  real 
author,  121. 

LACOCK,  ABNBR,  presides  over  nationa. 
republican  convention,  298. 

Lands,  public,  plan  for  their  seizure 
by  States,  229  ;  other  plans  for  sale 
of,  either  to  settlers,  229;  or  for 
internal  improvements,  230;  con- 
sidered a  national  asset,  230  ;  their 
cheapness  increases  wages  in  East, 
230,  231 ;  their  use  for  revenue 
urged  by  protectionists,  231 ;  pro- 
posals to  hasten  sale  of,  233 ;  their 
sale  to  States  proposed,  with  distri- 
bution of  proceeds,  234,  380 ;  Jack- 
son's veto  of  Clay's  land  bill,  381  ; 
renewed  attempt  of  Clay  to  distri- 
bute proceeds  of,  381,386. 

Latour,  A.  L.,  on  causes  of  English 
defeat  at  New  Orleans,  46. 

Lawless, ,  punished  by  Judge  Peck 

for  contempt  of  court,  220 ;  peti- 
tions Congress  for  redress,  220. 

Lawrence,  Richard,  attempts  tic  shoot 


INDEX 


493 


Jackson,  432 ;  thought  by  Jackson 
to  be  a  tool  of  Poindexter,  432,  433 ; 
acquitted  as  insane,  433. 

Lee,  Henry,  sees  value  for  Jackson  of 
corrupt  bargain  story,  118  ;  one  of 
Jackson's  managers,  135;  disap- 
pointed at  share  of  spoils,  with- 
draws, with  damaged  character, 
from  supporting  administration,  187; 
his  appointment  rejected  by  Sen- 
ate, 191 ;  tries  to  draw  out  Calhoun 
on  Seminole  affair  of  Jackson,  199 ; 
electoral  vote  for,  in  1832,  321. 

Legal  profession,  its  rise  before  the 
Revolution,  3-5;  character  of  pre- 
paration for,  4,  5  ;  the  opening  for 
ambitious  young  men,  5. 

Leigh,  B.  W.,  succeeds  Rives  in  Sen- 
ate, 366 ;  damages  party  standing 
by  refusal  to  obey  Virginia  instruc- 
tions or  resign,  366. 

Letcher,  Robert  P.,  urges  Adams,  if 
elected,  to  give  Clay  office,  124  ;  ar- 
ranges meeting  of  Adams  and  Clay, 
124 ;  wishes  more  than  a  majority 
of  judges  necessary  to  declare  a 
State  act  void,  167  n. 

Lewis,  William  B.,  denies  responsibil- 
ity of  Jackson  for  military  execu- 
tions in  1815,  52;  writes  letters 
signed  by  Jackson  urging  Monroe  to 
appoint  Drayton,  60,  61  ;  his  mo- 
tives in  inducing  Jackson  to  write, 
61,  62 ;  on  reasons  for  electing 
Jackson  to  Senate,  95 ;  the  origina- 
tor of  political  theatrical  effects, 
96,  97 ;  description  of  his  methods 
of  starting  spontaneous  movements, 
97  ;  his  ability  and  shrewdness,  97, 
98;  his  devotion  to  Jackson,  98; 
how  he  managed  Jackson,  98  ;  uses 
Jackson's  letters  to  Monroe  to  win 
federalists,  99  ;  secures  support  in 
North  Carolina,  100 ;  realizes  value 
of  "  corrupt  bargain "  cry,  118 ; 
publishes  Kremer's  letter,  121  ;  one 
of  Jackson's  managers,  135;  urges 
Clinton  men  to  support  Jackson, 
147,  148  ;  says  Jackson  will  serve 
only  one  term,  147  ;  in  the  "  kitchen 
cabinet,"  181 ;  accepts,  with  reluc- 
tance, position  as  Second  Auditor, 
183;  supposed  to  have  initiated 


spoils  system,  188 ;  draws  from 
Jackson  a  letter  defending  Mrs. 
Eaton,  195 ;  his  account  of  Jack- 
son's relations  with  Calhoun,  197- 
200;  suspects  Calhoun  of  having 
opposed  Jackson  in  1818,  197  ;  sends 
Hamilton  to  Crawford,  198  ;  learns, 
through  Forsyth,  of  Calhoun's  real 
attitude,  197  ;  tells  Jackson  of  the 
Forsyth  letter,  199,  200  ;  sent  to  get 
letter,  prefers  a  direct  statement 
from  Crawford,  200  ;  decides  that 
Jackson  must  take  a  second  term, 
and  be  succeeded  by  Van  Buren,  200 ; 
wishes  Jackson  to  name  Van  Buren 
as  successor,  201  ;  induces  Pennsyl- 
vania Legislature  to  issue  a  "  spon- 
taneous call  "  for  Jackson  to  accept 
a  second  term,  202 ;  on  Van  Buren's 
refusal  to  take  part  in  Calhoun 
quarrel,  206;  makes  office-holders 
subscribe  to  Blair's  paper,  207 ; 
complained  of  by  Ingham,  211 ;  pro- 
poses to  Kendall  a  convention  to 
nominate  Van  Buren,  317 ;  forces 
Eaton  to  support  Van  Buren  by 
threatening  him  with  Jackson's  dis- 
pleasure, 317  ;  shows  increased  con. 
fidence  in  managing  Jackson  after 
election,  323;  tries  to  dispel  Vir- 
ginian alarm  at  nullification  procla- 
mation, 330 ;  does  not  know  who 
proposed  removal  of  deposits,  346  ; 
and  opposes  removal,  347 ;  tries  in 
vain  to  dissuade  Jackson,  348,  349 ; 
although  an  office-holder,  interferes 
in  elections,  440 ;  aids  Jackson  in 
pecuniary  difficulties,  453;  incurs 
Jackson's  displeasure  by  refusing  to 
resign  office,  454,  455 ;  his  estimate 
of  public  opinion,  455 ;  removed  by 
Polk,  456. 

Linn,  L.  F.,  letter  of  Jackson  to,  57. 

Livingston,  Edward,  refuses  to  vote 
for  complimentary  address  at  end 
of  Washington's  administration,  14  ; 
his  justification,  14  n.  ;  aids  Jack- 
son in  defence  of  New  Orleans,  44  ; 
brings  Jackson  news  of  peace,  54 ; 
suggests  presidency  for  Jackson,  99  ; 
sees  value  of  "  corrupt  bargain " 
cry,  118 ;  one  of  Jackson's  man- 
agers, 135 ;  at  first  without  influ- 


494 


INDEX 


ence  on  Jackson's  administration, 
187 ;  Secretary  of  State,  212 ;  let- 
ter of  Madison  to,  on  nullification, 
253 ;  writes  nullification  proclama- 
tion, 328;  urges  Jackson  to  refer 
vigorously  to  French  delay  in  pay- 
ment of  claims,  403;  his  letters 
anger  French,  404;  denies  that 
Jackson's  message  is  a  threat,  406 ; 
moderates  tone  of  Jackson's  mes- 
sage, 407. 

Loco-focos,  their  origin  in  New  York, 
433 ;  revolt  against  Tammany,  433  ; 
their  Jeffersonian  principles,  434, 
435 ;  defeat  Tammany  leaders,  435, 
436 ;  declare  their  independence  of 
party,  437  ;  reunite  with  Tammany 
democrats,  437,  438;  influence  of 
their  principles,  438. 

Long,  James,  proclaims  independence 
of  Texas,  413. 

Louailler,  Louis,  aids  Jackson  in  pre- 
paring defence  of  New  Orleans,  45 ; 
criticises  Jackson  for  not  abolishing 
martial  law  and  is  arrested,  55 ;  his 
surrender  on  habeas  corpus  refused 
by  Jackson,  55;  tried  by  court- 
martial  and  acquitted,  56;  kept  in 
prison  by  Jackson,  56. 

Louis  Philippe,  gains  throne  of 
France,  217 ;  tries  to  settle  compen- 
sation question,  402;  orders  pay- 
ment, 408. 

Louisiana,  ceded  to  France  by  Spain, 
22;  ceded  to  United  States,  23; 
question  of  its  boundaries,  23; 
western  boundary  of,  settled  in 
Florida  treaty,  84,  85. 

Lowndes,  William,  nominated  for 
President  by  South  Carolina,  102 ; 
his  report  on  currency,  389. 

McCuitocH  vs.  MABYLA.ND,  166. 

MoDuffle,  George,  presents  report 
against  tariff,  his  argument,  247 ; 
introduces  bill  to  reduce  duties, 
258;  chairman  of  Committee  on 
Ways  and  Means,  262 ;  reports  bill 
reducing  duties,  263;  reports  in 
favor  of  Bank,  284 ;  presents  memo- 
rial of  Bank  f or  recharter,  300 ;  crit- 
icises proposed  new  charter,  301 ; 
answers  Bentou's  charges  agaiust 


Bank,  301 ;  fears  that  Jackson  will 
remove  deposits,  344. 

McGregor,  General  Sir  McGregor,  his 
career  in  Florida,  67. 

Mclntosh,  Creek  chief,  makes  treaty 
ceding  lands,  221  ;  killed  by  Creeks, 
222. 

McLane,  Louis,  Van  Buren's  instruc- 
tions to,  210,  215;  Secretary  of 
Treasury,  212 ;  proposes  to  sell 
public  lands  to  the  States,  233; 
reports  a  tariff  bill  in  1832,  264; 
argues  in  favor  of  Bank,  288  ;  his 
report  possibly  meant  to  cover 
Jackson's  retreat,  288 ;  transferred 
to  State  Department,  345 ;  opposes 
removal  of  deposits,  346. 

McLean,  John,  his  removal  urged  by 
Clay  on  ground  of  his  treachery  to 
Adams,  142  ;  refusal  of  Adams  to 
dismiss,  143  ;  continues  to  work  for 
Jackson,  146  ;  refuses  to  remove 
Bache,  although  a  defaulter,  146; 
replaces  him  at  last  by  a  Jackson 
man,  146 ;  removed  from  postmas- 
ter-generalship by  Jackson  for  re- 
fusing to  proscribe,  182 ;  appointed 
to  Supreme  Bench,  182 ;  declines 
anti-masonic  nomination,  295 ;  in 
case  of  Briscoe  vs.  Bank  of  Ken- 
tucky, 423,  424 ;  nominated  for  Pre- 
sident by  Ohio,  444. 

McNairy,  John,  appointed  judge  in 
Tennessee,  6;  quarrels  with  Jack- 
son, 21 ;  on  Jackson's  freedom  from 
vices,  101,  102. 

Macon,  Nathaniel,  receives  one  vote  hi 
presidential  caucus  of  1824,  110. 

Madison,  James,  orders  occupation  of 
West  Florida,  24;  inherits  conse- 
quences of  Jefferson's  policy,  33  ; 
pushed  into  war  by  the  West,  33, 
34 ;  refuses  armistice,  on  impress- 
ment issue,  34  ;  his  Virginia  resolu- 
tions of  1798,  253;  opposes  nulli- 
fiers  in  1830,  253,  254;  vetoes  a 
bank  in  1815,  265. 

Mails,  question  of  abolition  literature 
in,  411,  412. 

Mallary,  Rollin  C.,  introduces  bill  to 
adjust  tariff  on  wool  and  woollens, 
238,  239;  his  proposal  to  exclude 
imports,  242 ;  introduces  amend* 


INDEX 


495 


ments  on  floor  of  House,  243  in- 
troduces bill  to  regulate  appraisals, 
268. 

Mangum,  W.  P.,  on  mistakes  of  milli- 
ners, 338;  vote  for,  in  1836,  448. 

Marcy,  William  L.,  avows  famous 
spoils  doctrine,  211 ;  signs  petition 
for  a  branch  bank,  285;  alarmed 
at  speculation  in  1836,  380. 

Marshall,  John,  attitude  of  Jackson 
toward,  227  n. ;  his  death,  362 ;  in 
case  of  Briscoe  vs.  Bank  of  Ken- 
tucky, 423;  his  place  in  history, 
425,  426. 

Martin  vs.  Hunter's  Lessee,  168. 

Martineau,  Harriet,  describes  myste- 
rious influence  of  Kendall,  184  ;  de- 
scribes fanaticism  of  Calhoun,  331 ; 
shocked  at  crimes  of  violence  in 
United  States,  430  ;  describes  Jack- 
son's suspicious  of  plot  to  murder, 
432. 

Maryland,  passes  resolutions  against 
congressional  caucus,  109  ;  its  elec- 
toral vote  in  1828,  148. 

Mason,  Jeremiah,  refusal  of  Adams  to 
aid  in  his  election,  141 ;  appointed 
president  of  New  Hampshire  branch 
of  Bank,  271 ;  complained  of  on 
political  grounds  by  Woodbury,  272; 
reasons  for  his  appointment  given 
by  Biddle,  272,  273 ;  a  political  en- 
emy of  Woodbury  and  Hill,  273; 
attacked  by  Hill,  273  n. 

Massachusetts,  early  appraisal  law  in, 
for  debtors,  152  ;  anti-masonry  in, 
293,  294  ;  opposes  nullification,  and 
favors  tariff,  335  ;  nominates  Web- 
ster for  presidency,  444. 

Matthews,  General  George,  ordered  to 
sound  people  of  East  Florida  as  to 
annexation,  70. 

Mayo,  Dr.  Robert,  his  narrative  of 
Texas  intrigue,  416. 

Maysville  road  veto,  234. 

Metcalf,  Thomas,  elected  governor  of 
Kentucky  by  "anti-relief"  men, 
174. 

Mexico,  abolishes  slavery,  413,  414 ; 
excepts  Texas,  414;  forbids  immi- 
gration from  United  States,  415; 
revolution  in,  416;  war  of  Texan 
independence  with,  417  ;  entered  by 


Gaines,  419;  attempts  of  United 
States  to  pick  a  quarrel  with,  421 ; 
agrees  regarding  claims,  421  ;  fails 
to  fulfil  engagements,  421 ;  cause  of 
later  war  with,  422. 

Michigan,  has  boundary  dispute  with 
Ohio,  446;  frames  Constitution 
without  consent  of  Congress,  446; 
obliged  to  accept  boundary,  447 ; 
its  vote  in  presidential  election,  447. 

Mills,  E.  H.,  describes  Jackson's  per- 
sonal agreeableness,  101;  describes 
Crawford,  107  ;  describes  Clay,  108. 

Mississippi,  navigation  of,  claimed  as 
a  right  in  Tennessee  Constitution, 
13 ;  its  connection  with  Burr's 
scheme,  22;  secured  by  treaty  of 
1795, 22 ;  withdrawn  by  Spain,  23. 

Missouri,  favors  Jackson  after  Clay 
in  1824,  115  ;  its  vote  in  election  of 
1824  controlled  by  Scott,  125  ;  op- 
poses nullification,  335. 

Mitchell,  Governor  D.  B. ,  on  cause  of 
Seminole  war,  67,  68  ;  holds  Gaines 
responsible,  68. 

Mobile,  defence  of,  organized  by  Jack- 
son, 42,  43  ;  repulses  English,  43 ; 
captured  later  by  English,  47. 

Monroe,  James,  told  by  Cochrane  of 
intention  to  devastate  American 
coasts,  49  ;  favored  by  Jackson  for 
presidency,  60 ;  urged  by  Jackson 
to  appoint  Drayton  to  War  Depart- 
ment, 60,  62 ;  urged  by  Jackson  not 
to  proscribe  federalists,  63 ;  his  an- 
swer to  Jackson,  63 ;  asked  by  Jack- 
son to  signify  through  Rhea  his  de- 
sire for  seizure  of  Florida,  69 ;  does 
not  see  Jackson's  letter,  69  ;  timid- 
ity of  his  diplomacy,  77 ;  disap- 
proves of  Jackson's  doings  in  Flor- 
ida, 80;  countermands  Jackson's 
order  to  seize  St.  Augustine,  80; 
correspondence  with  Jackson  rela- 
tive to  Spanish  forts,  81 ;  willing  to 
abandon  Texan  claim,  84  ;  asks  Jef- 
ferson's advice  as  to  giving  Jack- 
eon  Russian  mission,  91 ;  receives 
every  electoral  vote  but  one,  92; 
given  a  dinner  by  Jackson,  199; 
said  by  Ringgold  to  be  Jackson's 
only  supporter  in  1818,  199 ;  denies 
Crawford's  account  of  cabinet  pro- 


INDEX 


ceedinga  in  1818,  204 ;  appoints 
commissioners  to  buy  land  from 
Creeks,  221 ;  in  1816  names  Sabine 
aa  western  boundary  of  Louisiana, 
412;  holds  same  position  as  Presi- 
dent, 412. 

Monroe  doctrine,  denounced  by  Ad- 
ams's opponents,  137. 

Morgan,  William,  writes  exposure  of 
free-masonry,  289;  persecuted  by 
masons,  289;  disappears,  supposed 
proof  of  his  murder,  290. 

Muter,  Judge  ,  overrides  Ken- 
tucky law  in  land-title  decision,  153 ; 
denounced  by  Legislature,  153 ;  re- 
verses decision,  153 ;  retired  in  1806, 
loses  his  pension,  154. 

NEW  ENGLAND,  opposes  Jefferson's 
foreign  policy,  32 ;  ceases  opposition 
after  Peace  of  Ghent,  51 ;  popular- 
ity of  Calhoun  in,  104;  supports 
Adams  in  1828,  148;  turns  from 
free  trade  to  protection,  237,  244 ; 
Jackson's  tour  in,  350. 

New  Hampshire,  popularity  of  Cal- 
houn in,  105;  part  played  in,  by  Hill, 
in  building  up  democratic  party, 
186,  187 ;  bitterness  of  politics  in, 
273,  274  ;  at  Lewis's  suggestion,  pro- 
poses national  convention  to  nomi- 
nate a  Vice-president,  317;  urges 
reduction  of  tariff,  335. 

New  Jersey,  votes  for  Adams  in  1828, 
148;  opposes  reduction  of  tariff, 
335. 

New  Orleans,  its  importance  in  Mis- 
sissippi navigation  controversy,  22, 
23;  danger  of  an  attack  upon,  in 
1812,  35 ;  defences  of,  organized  by 
Jackson,  44,  45 ;  battle  of,  46,  47 ; 
significance  of  victory,  47,  49,  50; 
continued  under  martial  law  by 
Jackson,  53-56. 

Jfew  York,  popularity  of  Calhoun  in, 
104;  passes  resolution  in  favor  of 
caucus,  109;  follows  Virginia,  109; 
controlled  by  Albany  Regency,  111; 
struggle  in,  over  manner  of  choosing 
electors,  111 ;  carried  by  Adams  men 
against  Regency,  111,  112  ;  failure  of 
Jackson  to  secure  support  in,  113 ; 
electoral  vote  of,  115  ;  development 


of  spoils  politics  in,  131-133 ;  casts 
electoral  vote  in  1828  by  districts, 
148  ;  asks  Jackson  to  accept  second 
term,  202  ;  instructs  Van  Buren  to 
vote  for  tariff  of  1828,  251 ;  rise  of 
anti-masons  in,  290-293 ;  disarrange- 
ment of  parties  in,  292 ;  passes  re- 
solutions  against  Bank,  316 ;  op* 
poses  nullification,  335 ;  development 
of  loco-focos  in,  433-438. 

Nichols,  Colonel,  his  acts  toward  In* 
dians  disavowed  by  England,  72. 

Niles,  Hezekiah,  slow  in  publishing 
Jackson's  controversy  with  Scott, 
65;  assumes  presence  of  British 
emissaries  in  Florida,  72,  79 ;  praises 
Jackson  as  uniformly  right,  79 ;  on 
numbers  of  presidential  candidates 
in  1824, 102  ;  opposes  caucus  nomi- 
nations, 109;  on  Calhouu's  opinion 
of  Jackson  in  1822,  114 ;  criticises 
Benton's  "  demos  krateo  "  doctrine, 
125;  on  character  of  campaign  of 
1828, 144  ;  objects  to  titles,  177 ;  his 
ignorance  of  England,  178 ;  on  need- 
lessness  of  quarrels  over  succession 
to  Jackson,  201 ;  hears  rumor  of 
quarrel  between  Jackson  and  Cal- 
houn, 209  ;  scoffs  at  Jackson's  West 
India  trade  arrangement,  216; 
preaches  high  tariff,  his  influence, 
238,  239;  on  Mallary's  wool  bill, 
240 ;  on  grain  trade,  242 ;  dissatis- 
fied with  tariff  of  1828,  245 ;  sur- 
prised at  Jackson's  attack  on  Bank, 
280  ;  on  expectation  of  a  Bank  veto, 
319 ;  on  craze  for  banks,  373 ;  and 
on  speculation,  380 ;  on  origin  of 
name  whig,  439. 

North  Carolina,  its  connection  with 
State  of  Franklin,  9  ;  "  relief  "  laws 
in,  152 ;  denounces  tariff,  256,  257, 
335 ;  does  not  favor  nullification, 
257;  denounces  nullification,  261, 
335. 

Nullification,  proposed  in  South  Caro- 
lina in  1827,  251 ;  its  relation  to 
Virginia  and  Kentucky  resolutions, 
252-254 ;  real  responsibility  of  Jef- 
ferson for,  254,  255  ;  difference  be- 
tween Georgia  and  Carolina  cases 
of,  260;  carried  out  in  1832,  327, 
328;  Jackson's  proclamation  against^ 


INDEX 


497 


328-330;  Jackson's  responsibility 
for,  330 ;  debate  on,  in  Senate,  333, 
334;  denounced  by  State  Legisla- 
tures, 335. 

DHIO,  favors  Jackson  as  second  choice 
in  1824,  115  ;  anti-masonry  in,  293  ; 
nominates  McLean  in  1836,  444; 
boundary  controversy  with  Michi- 
gan, 446,  447. 

O'Neil,  Peggy,  her  origin  and  career, 
193  ;  marries  Tirnberlake,  193  ;  mar- 
ries Eaton  under  suspicious  circum- 
stances, 193 ;  ostracised  by  wives 
of  cabinet  officers,  194  ;  attempts  of 
Jackson  to  force  her  on  society, 
194;  her  character  defended  by 
Jackson,  195 ;  asks  Jackson's  pro- 
tection against  General  Call,  195; 
paid  attentions  by  Van  Buren,  196 ; 
accompanies  Jackson  to  Tennessee, 
208;  her  varying  receptions  de- 
scribed by  Jackson,  208 ;  failure  of 
Jackson  to  benefit  by  his  efforts, 
211 ;  her  death,  212. 

Osborn  vs.  Bank  of  United  States,  166. 

Overton,  Judge  John,  letter  of  Jack- 
son to,  on  Calhoun  and  Van  Buren, 
201. 

Owens, ,  murder  case  of,  in  Ala- 
bama, 228. 

PxasoT, ,FrenchcAar0£  d'affaires, 

recalled,  407. 

Palmer,  William  A.,  defeated  for  vice- 
presidential  nomination,  444. 

Panama  mission,  debate  over,  137. 

Parton,  James,  his  biography  of  Jack- 
son quoted,  2,  3,  17,  25,  27,  61,  87, 
95,  99,  197,  200,  207,  208,  212,  317 
346,  452. 

Party  management,  its  development 
by  Lewis,  95-97  ;  its  theatrical  char- 
acter, 97 ;  use  of  catchwords,  118, 
136  ;  its  development  in  New  York, 
132;  its  "literary"  features,  133; 
partisan  newspapers,  133,  134 
linked  with  spoils  system,  189, 190. 

Peck,  Judge,  punishes  Lawless  for 
alleged  contempt  of  court,  220  ;  im- 
peached by  House,  220;  acquitted 
by  Senate,  220 ;  Jackson's  attitude 
in  his  case,  220. 


Pennsylvania,  popularity  of  Calhoun 
in,  104  ;  opposes  a  congressional 
caucus,  110  ;  popular  nomination  of 
Jackson  in,  112,  113;  turns  from 
Calhoun  to  Jackson,  112 ;  its  devo- 
tion to  Jackson,  115 ;  its  vote  in 
1828,  148;  at  Lewis's  suggestion, 
Legislature  asks  Jackson  to  consent 
to  reelection,  202  ;  although  a  high- 
tariff  State,  supports  Jackson,  232  ; 
its  demands  in  tariff,  244;  anti- 
masonry  in,  293 ;  Jackson's  hold 
upon,  unshaken,  in  1832,  299,  316  ; 
opposes  reduction  of  tariff,  335; 
grants  Bank  a  charter,  396  ;  con- 
ventions in,  nominate  Harrison,  444. 
Pensacola,  occupied  by  English  in 
1814,  42 ;  stormed  by  Jackson,  44 ; 
again  captured  in  1818,  75. 
Pickering,  Timothy,  supports  Jackson 
in  1828,  out  of  dislike  for  Adams, 
125. 
Pinckney,  Thomas,  praises  Jackson 

in  Creek  War,  41. 
Plumer,  William,  casts  electoral  vote 

for  Adams  in  1820,  92. 
Poindexter,  George,  accused  by  Jack- 
son of  trying  to  murder  him,  432  ; 
acquitted  by  Senate,  433. 
Poinsett,  Joel  R.,  fails  to  try  to  buy 
Texas,  his  reasons,  413 ;  again  fails 
under  Van  Buren,  415. 
Polk,  James  K.,  reports  bill  to  sell 
Bank  stock,  341  ;  his  report  on  sol- 
vency of  Bank,  343 ;  does  not  pro- 
pose action,  344  ;  reports  resolutions 
upholding  Jackson  and  Taney,  368  ; 
introduces  bill  to  forbid  receipt  of 
Bank  notes,  375. 
Porter,  Peter  B.,  prepares  plan  for  an 

Indian  territory,  224. 
Presidency,  Jackson's  conception  of, 

282,  322-325,  349,  353,  354,  362. 
"  Prophet,"  in  Tecumseh's  war,  38  n. 
Protection,  demand  for,  after  war  of 
1812,  93,  94;  becomes  a  political 
question,  94;  advocates  of,  oppose 
settling  of  new  lands,  230-232 ;  de- 
manded by  wool  manufacturers, 236- 
238 ;  its  doctrine  according  to  Niles, 
238,  239;  demand  for,  by  conven- 
tion of  wool-growers  and  manufac- 
turers, 240;  argument  for,  as  re* 


INDEX 


taliation  against  English  corn  laws, 
241,  242  ;  difficulty  of  getting  it 
before  Supreme  Court,  332,  333; 
saved  by  compromise  tariff,  339. 

RABUN,  GOVERNOR  WILLIAM,  corre- 
spondence with  Jackson  on  Indian 
troubles,  75. 

Randolph,  John,  leads  opposition  in 
abusing  Clay,  131;  bis  duel  with 
Clay,  131 ;  his  later  career  as  minis- 
ter to  Russia,  131 ;  himself  accused 
of  corruption,  131 ;  his  behavior  in 
Senate,  141 ;  complained  of  by  Ing- 
ham,  211 ;  tries  to  rouse  Virginia 
against  the  nullification  proclama- 
tion, 330. 

Reid,  Major  John,  begins  "Life  of 
Jackson,"  182. 

Republican  party,  pushes  Madison  into 
war  of  1812,  33;  its  incompetent 
management  of  war,  48,  49 ;  saved 
by  battle  of  New  Orleans,  50. 

Rhea,  J.,  a  filibuster  in  Florida,  69  ; 
supposed  by  Jackson  to  have  con- 
veyed Monroe's  approval  of  his  plan 
to  invade  Florida,  69,  70  n. 

Rhode  Island,  opposes  reduction  of 
tariff,  335. 

Rip  Rap  contract,  connection  of  Cal- 
houn  with,  106. 

Ritchie, ,  letter  of  Lewis  to,  on 

nullification  proclamation,  330. 

Rives,  W.  C.,  minister  to  France, 
negotiates  concerning  spoliation 
claims,  217 ;  refers  to  Jackson  as 
authority  for  Tyler's  plan  of  ex- 
chequer notes,  286,  287;  on  Ken- 
dall's willingness  to  abandon  re- 
moval of  deposits,  352 ;  resigns 
from  Senate,  365  ;  reflected,  366 ; 
boasts  of  outwitting  French  minis- 
ter, 404;  defeated  for  Vice-Presi- 
dent  by  Johnson,  442. 

Roane,  Archibald,  decides  election  of 
Jackson  as  major-general  over  Se- 
vier,  17. 

Robards,  Lewis,  accuses  Jackson  of 
adultery,  11 ;  applies  for  and  se- 
cures a  divorce,  12. 

Rowan,  Judge  John,  sustains  right  of 
State  to  tax  United  States  Bank, 
160 ;  in  Congress,  moves  to  oblige 


federal  courts  to  follow  procedure 
of  States,  218. 

Rucker, ,  at  democratic  national 

convention,  441. 

Rush,  Richard,  in  Arbuthnot  case, 
83  ;  appointed  Secretary  of  Treasury 
by  Adams,  141 ;  candidate  for  Vice- 
President,  149  ;  approves  of  branch 
drafts,  270. 

SANFORD,  NATHAN,  proposes  a  gold 
currency,  389. 

Santa  Anna,  gains  control  of  Mexico. 
416. 

Sargent,  Nathan,  on  factiousness  of 
Adams's  enemies,  137;  on  memorial 
of  Bank  for  recharter,  300. 

Schulze,  ,  republican  candidate 

for  Governor  of  Pennsylvania,  102. 

Scotch-Irish,  emigrate  to  Carolina,  1. 

Scott,  John,  urges  Adams  to  give 
Clay  a  place  in  administration,  125. 

Scott,  Winfield,  criticises  Jackson's 
defiance  of  Secretary  of  War,  64; 
challenged  to  a  duel  by  Jackson, 
refuses,  64;  reconciled  with  Jack- 
son, 114 ;  sent  by  Jackson  to  Charles- 
ton, 328. 

Sebastian,  Judge  William  K.,  over- 
rides Kentucky  law  in  land-title 
case,  153;  denounced  by  Legisla- 
ture, 153. 

Secession,  movement  for,  in  South- 
west, 22 ;  killed  by  annexation  of 
Louisiana,  25 ;  not  planned  by 
Burr,  26;  right  of,  asserted  by 
Georgia,  256;  planned  in  South 
Carolina,  260,  261. 

Seminole  war,  68-76 ;  controversy 
over,  between  Jackson  and  Cal- 
houn,  199-206,  209. 

Senate  of  United  States,  committee 
of,  condemns  Jackson's  career  in 
Florida,  83 ;  opposition  in,  to  con- 
firmation of  Clay  as  Secretary  of 
State,  122;  presided  over  by  Cal- 
houn  to  Adams's  disadvantage,  140, 
141 ;  postpones  Adams's  nomina- 
tions, 190;  reluctant  to  confirm 
many  of  Jackson's  appointments, 
191,  192;  election  of  Hill  to,  as 
a  rebuke,  192,  193;  rejects  Van 
Buren's  nomination,  210;  acquit* 


INDEX 


499 


Judge  Peck  on  impeachment,  220 ; 
debate  of  Webster  and  Hayne  in, 
233 ;  passes  bill  to  sell  public  lands, 
233 ;  debates  sale  of  lands,  234 ; 
rejects  resolution  against  Bank,  287; 
passes  Bank  charter,  319;  forces 
Jackson  to  sign  or  veto,  319 ;  fails 
to  pass  bill  over  veto,  320;  nullifi- 
cation debate  in,  332-334;  passes 
force  bill,  336;  passes  compro- 
mise tariff,  337 ;  refuses  to  reap- 
point  government  Bank  directors, 
361,  362  ;  rejects  Taney  for  Secre- 
tary of  Treasury  and  judge  of  Su- 
preme Court,  362;  demands  paper 
read  in  cabinet,  362  ;  censures  Jack- 
son, 363,  364 ;  refuses  to  receive 
Jackson's  protest,  364 ;  denounced 
by  party  press,  364 ;  bitterness  of 
debate  in,  364,  365;  rejects  ex- 
punging resolutions,  366;  finally 
passes  expunging  resolutions,  367 ; 
passes  bill  to  repeal  specie  circu- 
lar, 394 ;  on  relations  with  France, 
405;  declines  to  act,  405;  recog- 
nizes independence  of  Texas,  421. 

Sergeant,  John,  nominated  for  vice- 
presidency,  248,  321. 

Sergeant,  Thomas,  a  Jackson  man,  ap- 
pointed to  office  by  McLean, 
146. 

Sevier,  John ,  quarrels  with  Jack- 
eon,  16;  defeated  by  Jackson  in 
contest  for  position  of  major-gen- 
eral, 17 ;  elected  governor,  17 ;  his 
feud  with  Jackson,  17. 

Blade,  William,  defeated  for  vice- 
presidential  nomination,  444. 

Slamm,  ,  his  career  as  "equal 

rights  "  leader,  437,  438. 

Smith,  Samuel,  reports  in  favor  of 
Bank,  284. 

Smith,  William,  electoral  vote  of 
Georgia  for,  as  Vice-President,  149 ; 
vote  for,  in  1836,  449. 

Society  in  America,  its  democratic 
character,  177,  178 ;  its  ignorance 
of  foreign  countries,  178  ;  its  vio- 
lence and  turbulence  under  Jack- 
son, 428,  429  ;  its  factiousness,  430 ; 
its  zealousness  and  extravagance, 
431 ;  socialistic  ideas  in,  449,  450. 

Couth,  joins  with  West   in   advoca- 


ting free  lands,  232 ;  opposes  tariff, 
240,  244,  246,  255 ;  effect  of  tariff 
upon,  248-250;  its  error  in  attack- 
ing tariff  by  nullification,  256,  257  ; 
defied  by  Clay,  263 ;  considers  Jack- 
son's nullification  proclamation 
treachery,  330;  considers  compro- 
mise tariff  a  victory,  337  ;  enraged 
at  abolitionist  literature  in  mails, 
411 ;  wishes  annexation  of  Texas, 
414,  415  ;  expects  Jackson  to  secure 
it,  415  ;  its  zeal  for  Texas  in  1836, 
418  ;  gains  control  of  Democratic 
party,  458. 

South  Carolina,  nominates  Lowndes 
for  President  in  1824,  102  ;  opposes 
a  congressional  caucus,  109 ;  its  sea- 
man laws  held  unconstitutional, 
169  ;  later  held  constitutional,  219 ; 
nullification  movement  in,  251-261 ; 
changes  from  a  broad  to  strict-con- 
structionist  view,  255 ;  its  error  in 
opposing  tariff  by  nullification,  25ft, 
257  ;  its  protest  of  1828,  257  ;  disap- 
pointed by  Jackson's  Union  toast, 
259 ;  fails  to  call  a  convention,  260 ; 
denounces  Jackson's  letter  of  1831, 
260 ;  votes  for  Floyd  in  1832,  320 ; 
controlled  by  nullifiers,  327;  calls 
convention  to  nullify  tariff,  327; 
attempts  to  prevent  appeals  to 
federal  courts,  327,  328;  Union 
convention  in,  328 ;  proclamation 
of  Jackson  to,  328;  defies  Jack- 
son, 331,  337  ;  postpones  operation 
of  nullification,  337  ;  repeals  ordi- 
nance of  nullification,  337  ;  nullifies 
force  bill,  337,  338. 

Southwest,  its  attitude  on  Mississippi 
navigation,  22,  23 ;  secession  move; 
ment  in,  22,  25 ;  admires  Napoleon, 
30 ;  paper-money  craze  in,  151,  155  ; 
struggles  in,  between  frontiersmen 
and  constitutions,  151 ;  financial 
crisis  in,  156 ;  its  later  economic 
prosperity,  176. 

Spain,  grants  Mississippi  navigation 
in  1795,  22;  cedes  Louisiana  to 
France,  22  ;  withdraws  right  of  de- 
posit, 23 ;  its  position  as  to  Florida 
boundary,  23  ;  refuses  to  pay  Amer- 
ican claims,  23  ;  cedes  Florida,  23 ; 
neutral  in  war  of  1812,  42 ;  allows 


500 


INDEX 


English  to  operate  in  Florida,  43, 
65  ;  unable  to  govern  Florida,  67. 

"  Specie  Circular,"  392-394. 

Spencer,  John  C.,  reports  Morgan 
case  spoiled  by  political  coloring, 
290. 

Spoils  system,  developed  in  New 
York,  131-133;  introduced  into 
federal  government  by  Jackson, 
187-191 ;  effect  of,  upon  post-office, 
409,  410  ;  in  customs,  453,  454. 

Stanbaugh,  Colonel,  instructed  by 
Lewis  to  propose  a  second  term  for 
Jackson,  202. 

Stevens,  Thaddeus,  supports  Webster 
in  1836,  445. 

Stevenson,  Andrew,  elected  Speaker, 
constitutes  committees  unfavorable 
to  tariff,  241 ;  presides  over  demo- 
cratic convention,  442. 

Story,  Joseph,  takes  anti-masonic 
movement  too  seriously,  294  ;  in 
case  of  Briscoe  vs.  Bank  of  Ken- 
tucky, 423  ;  his  dissenting  opinion, 
424 ;  his  reasons  for  resigning,  427. 

Sturges  vs.  Crowninshield,  166. 

Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States, 
its  great  constitutional  decisions 
under  Marshall,  166-169,  174,  175 ; 
their  effect  discussed,  169-171 ;  de- 
nounced in  Kentucky,  171,  172; 
attacks  upon  in  Congress  during 
Jackson's  administration,  218,  219  ; 
difficulty  of  getting  it  to  pass  on  pro- 
tection, 333  ;  in  case  between  Bank 
and  Treasury  in  1834,  345;  com- 
position of,  altered  under  Jackson, 
423,  424  ;  its  decision  in  Briscoe  vs. 
Bank,  423,  424;  its  development 
to  this  point  national,  424-426; 
its  decision  permits  State  wild- 
cat banking,  426,  427;  degener- 
ates into  a  political  machine,  427, 
428. 

Surplus,  distribution  of,  favored  by 
Jackson,  233 ;  proposed  by  McLane 
and  Clay,  234 ;  bill  for,  passed  by 
Congress,  381 ;  objections  of  Jack- 
son to,  probably  overruled  for  polit- 
ical reasons,  382,  383 ;  regulation 
for,  382,  383 ;  its  effect  on  debtor 
States,  383;  benefits  small  States 
and  new  ones,  884 ;  squandered  in 


most  States,  385  ;  renewed  schemes 
for,  386  ;  payment  of,  386,  387. 
Swartwout,  Samuel,  recognizes  po- 
litical value  of  "  corrupt  bargain  " 
story,  118  ;  letter  of  Jackson  to,  on 
Clay,  121  ;  one  of  Jackson's  man- 
agers,  135  ;  his  embezzlement,  453  ; 
Jackson's  comments  on,  453,  454. 

TAMMANY  SOCIETY,  its  quarrel  with 
loco-focos,  433-436  ;  reunites  with 
loco-focos,  437,  438. 

Taney,  Roger  B.,  Attorney-General, 
212 ;  favors  removal  of  deposits, 
346 ;  Jackson's  principal  adviser, 
346,  351 ;  writes  "  Paper  read  to  the 
cabinet,"  354;  appointed  to  Trea- 
sury Department,  354  ;  sends  plan 
for  organization  of  deposit  bank  sys- 
tem, 357  ;  wishes  Kendall  to  organ- 
ize deposit  system,  358 ;  gives  de- 
posit banks  large  drafts  for  protec- 
tion against  United  States  Bank, 
359 ;  refers  to  Crawford  for  a  pre- 
cedent, 360  ;  his  reasons  for  removal 
of  deposits,  360,  361 ;  his  appoint- 
ment to  Treasury  rejected,  362 ; 
succeeds  Marshall  as  Chief  Justice, 
362,  424. 

Tariff,  of  1816,  its  causes,  93 ;  attempt 
to  raise,  in  1820,  94  ;  increased  in 
1824,  94-96;  its  connection  with  pub- 
lic lands,  230-232 ;  reform  of,  in 
England,  236  ;  of  1828,  events  lead- 
ing up  to,  236-246;  political  as- 
pects of,  239,  240  ;  testimony  as  to 
working  of,  243;  its  nature,  244- 
246;  opposition  of  South  to,  246, 
247  ;  its  operation  upon  the  South, 
248-250  ;  reasons  for  vote  in  1828, 
249-251 ;  declared  unconstitutional 
by  South,  255-257;  impossibility 
of  its  resting  stable,  258 ;  attempts 
to  modify  in  1830,  258 ;  free  trade 
convention  meets  at  New  York,  261 ; 
argument  of  Gallatin  against,  261 ; 
argument  of  protectionist  conven- 
tion for,  261 ;  revised  in  1832,  262- 
264 ;  wish  of  Jackson  to  reduce, 
263  ;  modified  in  1833,  332,  335-337; 
resolutions  of  States  upon,  335; 
fails  to  settle  anything,  338. 

Tassel,  George,  Cherokee   murdereq 


INDEX 


501 


tried  by  Georgia,  225;  fruitless  at- 
tempt of  United  States  Court  to 
protect,  226  ;  executed,  226. 

Tecumseh,  tries  to  unite  northern  and 
southern  Indians,  36  ;  gains  over  part 
of  Creeks,  37  ;  killed  at  battle  of 
Thames,  42. 

Tennessee,  frontier  society  in,  6-9  ; 
pioneer  settlers  of,  7  ;  litigation  in, 
8  ;  politics  in,  8,  9  ;  frames  a  consti- 
tution, 13  ;  admitted  by  Congress, 
13  ;  votes  for  Jefferson  in  1796, 14  ; 
payment  of  its  claim  by  Congress 
secured  by  Jackson,  15 ;  abuse  of 
credit  in,  19 ;  sympathizes  with 
Burr's  scheme,  25 ;  votes  money 
against  Creeks,  37 ;  nominates 
Jackson  for  presidency,  100 ;  op- 
poses a  congressional  caucus,  109 ; 
again  nominates  Jackson,  134 ;  its 
vote  in  1828,  148;  establishes  a 
State  bank  and  passes  relief  laws, 
156-159 ;  its  Court  of  Appeals  de- 
clares acts  unconstitutional,  159 ; 
opposes  nullification,  335  ;  refuses 
to  send  delegates  to  democratic 
convention,  441 ;  prefers  White 
to  Van  Buren,  441,  444  ;  carried  by 
Clay  in  1844,  460. 

Texas,  claim  to,  abandoned  in  Flor- 
ida treaty  of  1819,  84,  85,  412  ;  de- 
mand of  slaveholders  for,  after  Mis- 
souri Compromise,  412  ;  settlement 
of,  by  Americans,  413;  attempt  of 
Adams  to  buy,  413 ;  resists  aboli- 
tion of  slavery  by  Mexico,  414  ;  re- 
annexation  of,  agitated,  414;  its 
dimensions,  415 ;  claim  of  Erving 
regarding,  415;  attempt  of  Van 
Buren  to  buy,  415  ;  Mayo's  account 
of  plot  to  revolutionize,  416;  re- 
volts, its  success,  416,  417  ;  emigra- 
tion to,  418;  action  of  Gaines  in, 
419 ;  independence  of,  recognized, 
419,  421 ;  question  of  its  boundaries, 
419,  420 ;  applies  for  annexation, 
419;  absurdity  of  its  territorial 
claim,  420  ;  again  proposes  annex- 
ation, 421  ;  its  annexation  urged 
by  Jackson,  457-459;  question  of, 
ruins  Van  Buren,  458,  460. 

Thompson,  Smith,  in  case  of  Briscoe 
vs.  Bank  of  Kentucky,  423. 


Timberlake,  ,  marries  Peggy 

O'Neil,  his  suicide,  193. 

Tolaiid,  Henry,  makes  favorable  re- 
port on  Bank,  341. 

Tomkins,  Daniel  D.,  reflected  Vice- 
President,  92;  loses  popularity 
through  financial  difficulties  with 
government,  92,  93. 

Troup,  George  M.,  Governor  of  Geor- 
gia, takes  possession  of  Creek  lands, 
222  ;  defies  Adams,  222  ;  denounces 
tariff,  but  disclaims  disunion  senti- 
ment, 256. 

Tyler,  John,  recommends  to  Con- 
gress to  refund  Jackson's  fine,  57  ; 
refers  to  Jackson  as  authority  for 
his  "  exchequer  "  plan,  286  ;  on 
character  of  kitchen  cabinet,  324  ; 
said  to  have  mediated  between 
Clay  and  Calhoun  in  1833,  338  ;  re- 
fuses to  vote  for  expunging  resolu- 
tions and  resigns,  366  ;  reports  in 
favor  of  Bank,  368  ;  states  his  at- 
titude on  Bank  question,  375  ;  vote 
for,  in  1836,  449  ;  his  quarrel  with 
whigs  rejoices  Jackson,  456. 

VAN  BUREN,  MABTIN,  his  nomination 
by  Georgia  for  vice-presidency 
meets  ridicule,  107 ;  manages  the 
last  congressional  caucus,  110 ; 
leader  of  Albany  Regency,  111 ; 
seizes  position  of  manager  for  Jack- 
son, 129,  130  ;  hampered  previously 
by  Crawford's  ill-health,  130;  or- 
ganizes opposition  by  New  York 
methods,  131-133,  135 ;  announces 
devotion  to  States'  rights,  139  ;  his 
ambitions  cross  those  of  Calhoun, 
181 ;  Secretary  of  State,  182 ;  not 
a  guiding  force  in  administration, 
187  ;  struggles  with  Calhoun  for  con- 
trol of  patronage,  193  ;  wins  Jack- 
son's heart  by  courtesies  to  Mrs. 
Eaton,  196 ;  visits  Crawford  to 
bring  about  reconciliation  with  Jack- 
son, 198  ;  determined  on  by  kitchen 
cabinet  as  Jackson's  successor,  200  ; 
praised  by  Jackson  in  a  letter,  201 ; 
refuses  to  take  part  in  Calhoun 
affair,  206 ;  resigns  from  cabinet, 
209;  his  oracular  letter,  209;  ap- 
pointed minister  to  England,  210 ; 


502 


INDEX 


his  instructions  to  McLane,  210; 
his  nomination  rejected,  210;  de- 
termination of  Jackson  to  make 
him  President,  211 ;  dodges  vote  on 
tariff,  239;  obtains  instructions  to 
vote  for  tariff  of  1828,  251;  at- 
tacked by  Calhoun,  251 ;  signs  peti- 
tion for  branch  bank  at  Albany, 
285  ;  later  condemns  federal  banks, 
285 ;  loses  ground  in  Pennsylvania 
because  of  New  York  opposition  to 
Bank,  316 ;  'nominated  by  demo- 
cratic convention  only  through  dic- 
tation of  Jackson,  317,  318  ;  electo- 
ral vote  for,  321 ;  his  opposition  to 
removal  of  deposits  overcome  by 
Kendall,  346,  347  ;  as  Secretary  of 
State,  orders  Poinsett  to  buy  Texas, 
415 ;  rejects  Texas  annexation  of- 
fer, 421 ;  reluctant  to  have  war, 
421 ;  revolt  of  "  equal  rights  "  party 
against,  in  New  York,  433  ;  opposi- 
tion to,  in  Tennessee,  441 ;  unani- 
mously nominated  to  succeed  Jack- 
son, 442;  his  letter  of  acceptance, 
442  ;  his  letter  to  Sherrod  Williams 
displeases  "  equal  rights  "  men,  448  ; 
elected  President,  448;  obliged  to 
suffer  consequences  of  Jackson's 
mistakes,  450  ;  deserves  reputation 
of  wire-puller,  450  ;  his  character, 
451 ;  shows  ability  as  President, 
451 ;  unfortunate  in  circumstances, 
451,  452;  his  inauguration  held  by 
Jackson  to  be  a  personal  triumph, 
452;  his  nomination  prevented  in 
1844  by  use  of  Jackson's  Texas  let- 
ter, 458. 

Vermont,  stronghold  of  anti-masonry, 
293  ;  opposes  reduction  of  tariff, 
335. 

Virginia,  resolves  in  favor  of  caucus, 
109  ;  led  by  an  oligarchy,  109 ;  "  re- 
lief laws"  in,  152;  adopts  princi- 
ple of  nullification,  257  ;  offers  to 
mediate  with  South  Carolina,  335 ; 
condemns  dismissal  of  Duane  and 
removal  of  deposits,  365 ;  favors 
expunging  resolutions,  366  ;  causes 
successive  resignations  of  senators, 
366 ;  its  delegates  at  democratic 
convention  refuse  to  vote  for  John- 
son, 442. 


Virginia  Resolutions  of  1798,  their 
nature  and  relation  to  nullification, 
253  ;  explained  by  Madison,  254. 

WALLACE,  JUDGE,  in  Kentucky  land- 
title  case,  153. 

War  of  1812,  causes,  33,  34 ;  brought 
on  by  young  republicans,  34  ;  unne- 
cessary for  redress,  34  ;  services  of 
Jackson  in,  35-47  ;  Creek  war  dur- 
ing, 37-41 ;  defence  of  Mobile,  43  ; 
Jackson's  capture  of  Peusacola, 
44 ;  battle  of  New  Orleans,  45^7  ; 
American  defeats  in,  47-49  ;  finan- 
cial collapse  during,  48,  49  ;  fails 
to  gain  avowed  objects,  60 ;  good 
results  from,  51. 

Ward,  ,  massacred  by  Mexicans, 

417. 

Warren,  Admiral,  offers  Madison  an 
armistice  in  1812,  34. 

Washington,  George,  appoints  Jack- 
son District  Attorney,  11 ;  opposed 
by  Jackson  in  Congress,  14,  15 ; 
maintains  peace  by  Jay  treaty,  31. 

Watkins,  Tobias,  discovered  to  be  a 
defaulter,  189;  Jackson's  virulence 
toward,  189  n. 

Wayman  vs.  Southard,  167. 

Wayne,  James  M.,  at  meeting  in 
Athens  to  protest  against  tariff, 
256 ;  appointed  to  Supreme  Court, 
423. 

Weatherford,  chief  of  Creeks  in  war 
of  1813,  37. 

Webster,  Daniel,  favors  Calhoun  for 
President  in  1824,  105;  on  Jack- 
son's presidential  manners,  114 ; 
urges  Adams  not  to  proscribe  fed- 
eralists, 125  ;  on  popular  feeling 
after  election  of  1828, 179 ;  on  oppo- 
sition in  Senate  to  Jackson's  nomi- 
nations, 191 ;  defends  federal  judi- 
ciary from  attack  in  Rowan's  amend- 
ment, 218 ;  his  debate  with  Hayne, 
233,  257 ;  on  reasons  for  New  Eng- 
land's advocacy  of  tariff,  237  ;  votes 
for  tariff  of  1828,  his  reasons,  251 ; 
holds  branch  drafts  legal,  270 ;  his 
connection  with  appointment  of 
Mason,  272,  273  ;  wearies  of  consti- 
tutional debate  with  Calhoun,  334 ; 
attacks  compromise  tariff,  336 ; 


INDEX 


503 


Bhows  moral  weakness  by  abandon- 
ing free  trade,  336 ;  condemns  pet 
bank  policy,  357  ;  bis  report  on  re- 
moval of  deposits,  364  ;  in  1842 
calls  a  bank  an  obsolete  idea,  401 ; 
letter  of  Catron  to,  on  Texas,  418 ; 
defeated  by  Harrison  for  anti-ma- 
sonic nomination,  444  ;  bis  presiden- 
tial ambitions,  444  ;  vote  for,  448. 

Webster,  Ezekiel,  on  Calhoun's  popu- 
larity in  New  Hampshire,  105. 

West,  demands  free  land,  232;  de- 
mands internal  improvements,  232. 

Whig  party,  not  organized  before 
1830,  289  ;  its  national  convention 
of  1831,  298;  makes  Bank  the  is- 
sue of  campaign,  298,  299  ;  sup- 
ports banks  against  metallic  cur- 
rency, 389  ;  finally  abandons  Bank, 
401  ;  fails  to  unite  in  1834,  439  ; 
coalesces  partly  with  anti-masons, 
444 ;  divides  between  White  and 
Harrison,  444,  445. 

White,  Hugh  L.,  a  claim  of  his  pushed 
by  Jackson  in  Congress,  15 ;  refuses 
to  resign  from  Senate  to  give  place 
to  Eaton,  212;  piqued  at  Jackson 
for  failure  to  receive  War  Depart- 
ment, 212 ;  goes  into  opposition, 
365  ;  hated  by  Jackson,  441 ;  leads 
Tennessee  against  Van  Buren,  441 ; 
nominated  for  President,  444  ;  vote 
for,  in  1836,  448. 

Whitney,  Reuben  M.,  accuses  Biddle 
of  nepotism,  306 ;  proved  to  have 
lied,  306;  enters  kitchen  cabinet, 
306  ;  publishes  an  "  Address  to  the 
American  People,"  306;  urges  re- 
moval of  deposits,  347  ;  suggests  it 
to  Duane,  349 ;  becomes  agent  of 
Treasury  in  dealing  with  deposit 
banks,  358  ;  gives  deposits  for  polit- 
ical reasons,  358,  359. 

tfilkins,  William,  receives  Pennsylva- 
nia's electoral  vote  in  1832,  321. 


Wilkinson,  General  James,  Jackson's 
contempt  for,  26;  quarrels  with 
Jackson,  35  ;  occupies  Mobile,  42. 

Williams,  John,  senator  from  Tennes- 
see, his  popularity,  95  ;  defeated 
by  Jackson  for  reelection,  95. 

Williams,  Sherrod,  interrogates  candi- 
dates in  1836,  447. 

Wirt,  William,  calls  South  Carolina 
seaman  laws  unconstitutional,  169  ; 
his  opinion  reversed  by  Berrien, 
219  ;  holds  branch  drafts  legal,  270  ; 
nominated  for  President  by  anti- 
masons,  294;  his  letter  of  accep- 
tance, 294,  295;  hopes  to  be  sup- 
ported by  national  republicans,  295 ; 
later  wishes  to  withdraw,  295  ;  vote 
for,  in  1832,  321. 

Wood,  John,  shot  by  Jackson  for  in- 
subordination, 40. 

Woodbury,  Levi,  shocked  at  a  billiard 
table  in  the  White  House,  146; 
gives  place  in  Senate  to  Hill,  be- 
comes Secretary  of  Navy,  212  ;  com- 
plains to  Ingham  of  Mason,  271, 
272  ;  his  animosity  against  Masou 
and  Webster,  273  ;  elected  to  Sen- 
ate as  an  Adams  man,  274  ;  neutral 
on  removal  of  deposits,  346  ;  sends 
report  to  Congress  on  banking,  358 ; 
refuses  to  receive  branch  drafts, 
374  ;  report  on  circulation,  391. 

Worcester,  a  missionary,  condemned 
for  violating  Georgia  laws  concern- 
ing Cherokees,  226  ;  refuses  at  first 
to  accept  a  pardon,  228. 

Worthington,  ,  seizes  Spanish 

papers  under  Jackson's  orders,  89. 

Wright,  Fanny,  her  career,  449. 

Wright,  Silas,  opposes  Mallary's  wool 
tariff,  243 ;  announces  pet  bank 
policy,  357. 

YOUNG  MEN'S  CONVENTION,  nominates 
Clay,  318. 


AMERICAN    MEN    OF 
LETTERS 

Biographies  of  our  most  eminent  American  Authors,  written  by 
men  who  are  themselves  prominent  in  the  field  of  letters.  Each 
volume,  with  portrait,  i6mo,  gilt  top. 

The  writers  of  these  biographies  are  themselves  Americans,  generally  familiar 
vith  the  surroundings  in  "which  their  subjects  lived  and  the  conditions  under  which 
heir  work  was  done.  Hence  the  volumes  are  peculiar  for  the  rare  combination  of 
'ritical  judgment  with  sympathetic  understanding.  Collectively ',  the  series  offers 
i  biographical  history  of  American  Literature. 

The  following,  each,  $1.2$ 

WILLIAM  CULLEN  BRYANT.    By  JOHN  BIGELOW. 
J.  FENIMORE  COOPER.    By  T.  R.  LOUNSBURY. 
GEORGE  WILLIAM  CURTIS.    By  EDWARD  GARY. 
RALPH  WALDO  EMERSON.  By  OLIVER  WENDELL  HOLMES. 
BENJAMIN  FRANKLIN.    By  JOHN  BACH  MCMASTER. 
WASHINGTON  IRVING.    By  CHARLES  DUDLEY  WARNER. 
MARGARET  FULLER  OSSOLI.    By  T.  W.  HIGGINSON. 
EDGAR  ALLAN  POE.    By  GEORGE  E.  WOODBERRY. 
GEORGE  RIPLEY.    By  O.  B.  FROTHINGHAM. 
WILLIAM  GILMORE  SIMMS.    By  WILLIAM  P.  TRENT. 
BAYARD  TAYLOR.    By  ALBERT  H.  SMYTH. 
HENRY  D.  THOREAU.    By  FRANK  B.  SANBORN. 
NOAH  WEBSTER.    By  HORACE  E.  SCUDDER. 
NATHANIEL  PARKER  WILLIS.    By  HENRY  A.  BEERS. 

The  following,  each,  $1.10,  net ;  postage,  10  cents 

NATHANIEL  HAWTHORNE.  By  GEORGE  E.  WOODBERRY. 
HENRY  W.  LONGFELLOW.  'By  T.  W.  HIGGINSON. 
FRANCIS  PARKMAN.    By  H.  D.  SEDGWICK. 
WILLIAM  HICKLING  PRESCOTT.    By  ROLLO  OGDEN. 
JOHN  GREENLEAF  WHITTIER.    By  GEO.  R.  CARPENTER. 
The  set,  19  volumes,  $23.00 ;  half  polished  morocco,  $50.50. 

In  preparation 

BRET  HARTE.    By  HENRY  C.  MERWIN. 
OLIVER  WENDELL  HOLMES.    By  S.  M.  CROTHERS. 
Other  titles  to  be  added. 

HOUGHTON  MIFFLBSf  COMPANY 


AMERICAN 

COMMONWEALTHS 

Volumes  devoted  to  such  States  of  the  Union  as  have  a  striking 
political,  social,  or  economic  history.  Each  volume,  with  Map 
and  Index,  i6mo,  gilt  top,  $1.25,  net ;  postage  12  cents.  The  set, 
19  vols.,  $23.75;  half  polished  morocco,  $52.25. 

The  books  which  form  this  series  are  scholarly  and  readable  individually ; 
collectively,  the  series,  when  completed,  will  present  a  history  of  the  nation,  setting 
forth  in  lucid  and  vigorous  style  the  varieties  of  government  and  of  social  life  to 
be  found  in  the  various  commonwealths  included  in  the  federal  union, 

CALIFORNIA,    By  JOSIAH  ROYCE. 

CONNECTICUT.    By  ALEXANDER  JOHNSTON.  (Revised  Ed.) 

INDIANA.     By  J.  P.  DUNN,  JR.     (Revised  Edition.) 

KANSAS.    By  LEVERETT  W.  SPRING.     (Revised  Edition.) 

KENTUCKY.    By  NATHANIEL  SOUTHGATE  SHALER. 

LOUISIANA.    By  ALBERT  PHELPS. 

MARYLAND.    By  WILLIAM  HAND  BROWNE.    (Revised  Ed.) 

MICHIGAN.    By  THOMAS  M.  COOLEY.    (Revised  Edition.; 

MINNESOTA.    By  WM.  W.  FOLWELL. 

MISSOURI.     By  LUCIEN  CARR. 

NEW  HAMPSHIRE.    By  FRANK  B.  SANBORN. 

NEW  YORK.    By  ELLIS  H.  ROBERTS.    2  vols.    (Revised  Ed.) 

OHIO.     By  RUFUS  KING.     (Revised  Edition.) 

RHODE  ISLAND.    By  IRVING  B.  RICHMAN. 

TEXAS.    By  GEORGE  P.  GARRISON. 

VERMONT.    By  ROWLAND  E.  ROBINSON. 

VIRGINIA.    By  JOHN  ESTEN  COOKE.     (Revised  Edition.) 

WISCONSIN.    By  REUBEN  GOLD  THWAITES. 

In  preparation 

GEORGIA.    By  ULRICH  B.  PHILLIPS. 
ILLINOIS.    By  JOHN  H.  FINLEY. 
IOWA.    By  ALBERT  SHAW. 
MASSACHUSETTS.    By  EDWARD  CHANNING. 
NEW  JERSEY.    By  AUSTIN  SCOTT. 
OREGON.    By  F.  H.  HODDER. 
PENNSYLVANIA.    By  TALCOTT  WILLIAMS. 

HOUGHTON  MIFFLIN  COMPANY 


AMERICAN  STATESMEN 

Biographies  of  Men  famous  in  the  Political  History  of  the  United 
States.  Edited  by  JOHN  T.  MORSE,  JR.  Each  volume,  with  por- 
trait, i6mo,  gilt  top,  £1.25.  The  set,  31  volumes,  #38.75;  half 
morocco,  $85.25. 

Separately  they  are  interesting  and  entertaining  biographies  of  our  most  emi- 
nent public  men ;  as  a  series  they  are  especially  remarkable  as  constituting  a 
history  of  A  merican  politics  and  policies  more  complete  and  more  usefuljor  in* 
struction  and  reference  than  any  that  I  am  aware  of.  —  HON.  JOHN  W.  GRIGGS, 
Ex-United  States  Attorney-General. 

BENJAMIN  FRANKLIN.     By  JOHN  T.  MORSE.  JR. 

SAMUEL  ADAMS.     By  JAMES  K.  HOSMER. 

PATRICK  HENRY.     By   MOSES  COIT  TYLER. 

GEORGE  WASHINGTON.     By  HENRY  CABOT  LODGE.   2  volumes. 

JOHN  ADAMS.     By  JOHN  T.  MORSE,  JR. 

ALEXANDER  HAMILTON.     By  HENRY  CABOT  LODGE. 

GOU VERNE UR  MORRIS.     By  THEODORE  ROOSEVELT. 

JOHN  JAY.    By  GEORGE  PELLBW. 

JOHN  MARSHALL.    By  ALLAN  B.  MAGRUDER. 

THOMAS  JEFFERSON.     By  JOHN  T,  MORSE,  JR. 

JAMES  MADISON.     By  SYDNEY  HOWARD  GAY. 

ALBERT  GALLATIN.    By  JOHN  AUSTIN  STEVENS. 

JAMES  MONROE.     ByD.  C.  GILMAN. 

JOHN  QUINCY  ADAMS.    By  JOHN  T.  MORSE,  JR. 

JOHN  RANDOLPH.     By  HENRY  ADAMS. 

ANDREW  JACKSON.     By  W.  G.  SUMNER 

MARTIN  VAN  BUREN.     By  EDWARD  W.  SHBPARIX 

HENRY  CLAY.    By  CARL  SCHURZ.    2  volumes. 

DANIEL  WEBSTER.     BY  HENRY  CABOT  LODGE. 

JOHN  C  CALHOUN.    By  DR.  H.  VON  HOLST. 

THOMAS  H.  BENTON.    By  THEODORE  ROOSEVELT. 

LEWIS  CASS.    By  ANDREW  C.  MCLAUGHLIN. 

ABRAHAM  LINCOLN.    By  JOHN  T.  MORSE,  JR.    2  volumes. 

WILLIAM  H.  SEWARD.     By  THORNTON  K.  LOTHROP. 

SALMON  P  CHASE.     By  ALBERT  BUSHNELL  HART. 

CHARLES  FRANCIS  ADAMS.    By  C.  F.  ADAMS,  JR. 

CHARLES  SUMNER.     By  MOORFIELD  STOREY. 

THADDEUS  STEVENS.    By  SAMUEL  W.  McCALL. 

SECOND  SERIES 

Biographies  of  men  particularly  influential  in  the  recent  Political  History  of  the 
Nation.    Each  volume,  with  Portrait,  i2mo,  $1.25  net ;  postage  12  cents. 
This  second  series  is  intended  to  supplement  the  original  list  of  American 
Statesmen  by  the  addition  of  the  names  of  men  who  have  helped  to  make  the  his- 
tory of  the  United  States  since  the  Civil  War. 

JAMES  G.  BLAINE.  By  EDWARD  STANWOOD. 
JOHN  SHERMAN.  By  THEODORE  E.  BURTON. 
WILLIAM  McKINLEY.  By  T.  C.  DAWSON. 

ULYSSES  S.   GRANT.    By  SAMUEL  W.  McCALL.    In  preparation 
Other  interesting  additions  to  the  list  to  be  made  in  the  future. 

HOUGHTON  MIFFLIN  COMPANY 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


RENEWED  BOOKS  ARE  SUBJECT  TO  IMMEDIATE 
RECALL 


1  3  1966 
RET.  A 

DEC  6     1966 


6  1967 


OEC4 


196?, 


16  DEC '67 


DECHREC'D 


LIBRARY,  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  DAVIS 

Book  Slip-70«t-9,'65(F7151s4)458 


198667 

E382 

Sumner,  W.G.  S8 

Andrew  Jackson. 


LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
DAVIS 


